Let's Find Common Ground - Bipartisan Trust and Common Ground in Congress: Reps. Dusty Johnson (R) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D)

Episode Date: April 25, 2024

More than 50 Members of Congress have announced that they’re not running for reelection in 2024. Many cite political dysfunction and angry divisive rhetoric as reasons behind their decision to quit. Retiring Democratic Senator Joe Manchin recently told CNN: “Every one of us should be ashamed of what we’re living through now in the 118th Congress.” But there are constructive examples of cooperation. On the next episode of "Let's Find Common Ground", we host a lively conversation with Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Illinois) and Dusty Johnson (R-South Dakota). Both argue that finding common ground is a crucial ingredient in governing and making progress on solving the biggest challenges facing the nation. Johnson and Krishamoorthi also speak of their work together as Members of the bipartisan House Select Committee on China.

More than 50 members of Congress have announced they're not running for re-election in 2024. Many cite dysfunction and angry, divisive rhetoric as reasons behind their decision to quit. Retiring Democratic Senator Joe Manchin recently told CNN, Every one of us should be ashamed of what we're living through now in the 118th Congress. When asked about the current mood in the House, Texas Republican Tony Gonzalez said, quote, everyone is tired. We're exhausted. It's been a brutal Congress. Today on Let's Find Common Ground, trust in Congress and how to move forward with two

U.S. representatives, one Democrat, one Republican. When you get to Washington, D.C., or at least to Congress, you have two choices. Either you can make speeches or you can get results. Governing this country is going to mean finding common ground. I'm committed to it. Raj is committed to it. Even when it isn't good politics, that's what we do. This is Let's Find Common Ground. I'm Ashley Miltite.

I'm Richard Davies. This episode features two members of Congress from opposing parties who actually like each other and say that finding common ground is a crucial ingredient in governing and making progress on solving the biggest challenges facing the nation. In late April we saw a glimpse of that when bipartisan majorities of House members broke through months of gridlock and a majority voted to approve military aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. And there are other, far less publicized examples of cross-party cooperation. But that sad polling shows that about two-thirds of Americans say they have little or no trust

and confidence in Congress. Our guests are Republican Dusty Johnson of South Dakota and Democrat Raja Krishnamurthy of Illinois. Before the interview begins, it's worth saying that both representatives are members of the House Select Committee on China, and they discuss the panel's bipartisan work in this conversation. The main topic of this interview is trust in Congress. Clearly, most Americans don't trust members of Congress

or the federal government, for that matter. Are the voters right to be distrustful? Dusty Johnson, can you take that first? I think the distrust has gone way too far. We see that Americans believe less in their institutions. Every year that goes by, it gets worse. And it's every institution. And of course, there are bad actors in our churches and bad actors in the media and bad actors in politics. But these are the institutions that tie us together. And so in part of the politicians,

we need to do a better job of shining a light on the fact that there are good things going on, that there are good people who are trying to move the ball down field. And Rajah isn't a bad person just because he's a Democrat. And I'm not a bad person just because I'm a Republican. Anything to add, Rajah? I echo Dusty's sentiments. person just because he's a Democrat, and I'm not a bad person just because I'm a Republican. Anything to add, Roger? I echo Dusty's sentiments. I think that, you know, the select committee on which we both sit is a prime example of a, I think it's perhaps the most bipartisan committee of any in Congress,

House or Senate at this point. I think that it's productive, it's serious. Now, I think that we got lucky that both Speaker McCarthy and Hakeem Jeffries chose some very good members on both sides. We have excellent staff, but I think it's a good example of what positive results can occur when we get good people with good intentions to work together. When we're given a chance, we can rise to the occasion. Both of you score very highly on the Common Ground scorecard.

How important is it to each of you to reach out to voters and members of Congress from the other side? Raja, do you wanna go first? Sure, well, I think that's essential to me because I think that when you get to Washington, DC, or at least to Congress, you have two choices, either you can make speeches or you can get results. Both Dusty and I, I think we believe in getting results,

although occasionally we have to make speeches as well, but it turns out that you have more to say when you can actually get something done than otherwise. I think that the 24 hour news cycle and social media provide kind of incentives to not get things done, to go after people on the other side, engage in name calling, and you get picked up very quickly and you get a lot of clicks.

But at the end of the day, in my case, I'm sure it's the same with Dusty. You have to look at the person in the mirror and you have to decide, is that the person that I want to be? And then you're accountable to your voters and your family and what kind of a person do they want you to be? And I think we both believe in trying to get to solutions. And that means you have to work with people on the other side, especially in a 50 50 country, such as the country that we live in right now. Dusty Johnson, your your common ground scorecard results

are almost off the charts. They're so good. So is this something that's really important to you? It is. Raj, what did Biden win your district by? Do you have any recollection? Double digits. I think that's the thing about both Raj and I. I mean, Trump would have won my district by 30 or 35 points. And the race wasn't close to Raj's district the other way. And so in many respects, we would be more popular at home

if we played the role of toxic partisan warriors. And fear and anger can be great motivators in the short term. Unfortunately, they can be really effective motivators. But I think the reason my common ground score is good, something I'm proud of, is because I know that fear and anger are a terrible foundation for a country, for a marriage, for a nonprofit, for a business. And so at some point, we got to come together. Governing this country is going to mean finding common ground.

I'm committed to it. Raj is committed to it, even when it isn't good politics. That's what we do. Are your high common ground scorecard numbers, are they important to you, Rajah? Do you value that? Yes. I very much prize bipartisanship. I like your metrics. Although now I'm very competitive. So I'm anxious to find out why Dusty is off the charts and what can I do to be more like Dusty? In all seriousness, I think that, I think we just feel more comfortable

kind of in a situation where we're productive. I think that unfortunately, I cannot say that is common in Congress right now, as you can tell from some of the chaos and dysfunction. But, you know, at the end of the day, the American people want us to behave more this way than some other way. to behave more this way than some other way. We've had a whole bunch of members of Congress who've decided not to run again. Do you think that's partially because that the whole mood of Congress has become much more difficult to navigate? And that includes finding common ground with people from the other party? common ground with people from the other party.

100% absolutely. The toxic political environment in this country, it's not just Congress. I mean it's certainly on social media, it's certainly on cable news and certainly within our political party infrastructure that toxicity is absolutely 100% causing good Americans to turn away from public service. Yes, absolutely. I think that you look at some of the members who are retiring right now or leaving,

and some of them are leaving in the middle of the term. It's become so hard for them to kind of function in this atmosphere, this culture that they wanna leave, even before the next election, that tells you something about kind of the wrong direction, the wrong track that we're on. I'm hopeful that we can kind of get back on the right track,

but at the same time, there are certain reforms that we, I think probably Dusty and I would both agree on that need to be made in order for that to happen. And perhaps the general politics of our country need to change, which might be slightly above my pay grade, but I notice it anyway, and I try to practice it in my own modest way as much as I can. You're both members of the House Select Committee on China. Can you talk about your work with members of both parties on this committee? It's interesting to the extent we've had contentious issues in the

committee and we've had some, I mean not all kumbaya, but the contentiousness, the intensity does not break down along party lines. You can look at this when we're talking about a trade agenda. There are certainly members of both the Republican and the Democratic parties on the committee who I think have a more industrial policy approach, a more protectionist or mercantilist approach toward trade, and there are others of us. Jake Aukencloss, a Democrat from Massachusetts, Dusty Johnson, a Republican from South Dakota, who really believe in the power of free markets. Not necessarily that we ever want to be economically beholden to China, but that we want to make sure

we're making decisions that make America stronger as we decide what the global marketplace looks like. And so, yeah, on some of these economic issues, we'll have some on the committee in one place, some on the committee in the other place. It's so refreshing to have those divisions be along philosophical grounds though, rather than just on partisan ground.

Yeah, I would agree. You know, I relate the story of our first meeting as a committee. It occurred in then speaker, Kevin McCarthy's conference room. It's a very large conference room. And he addressed us and very interestingly, he had to his left, Hakeem Jeffries.

And that very rarely occurs by the way, where the speaker and the minority leader address a group of legislators in a bipartisan way. And he basically said to us, look, if you want to practice politics, I've got committees for that, so let me know. But if you want to get something done, this is that committee. And it's in that spirit that we kind of approach a lot of our issues. But basically the issue is we try to identify

those common denominators on issues where we can agree, and then we build out from there, as opposed to, you know, canvas the waterfront for all the different disagreements that we could possibly have, and then, you know, have a minority report on that and the majority report on the other issues that we wanna talk about. We really strive to have one report or one investigation that's going to emphasize where we agree and then go deep on those issues. And because of that, I think we've managed

to elevate certain topics that maybe didn't get the attention they deserve. So yesterday we just issued a fentanyl report related to the CCP's role in our fentanyl crisis. When you say CCP, you mean the Chinese Communist Party. The Chinese Communist Party. I apologize for the acronym, but essentially that report got a lot of attention

because on a bipartisan basis, we identified certain new facts related to the CCP's role in the fentanyl crisis. And then we also talked about bipartisan policy solutions that we'd like to see going forward, which I'm going to try to work with Dusty and others to actually incorporate into law this Congress. So this sounds great, but are there other contentious issues, maybe other committees where the two of you see opportunities to find common ground? Yeah, I've worked hard to get onto the committees I'm on, not because they're good fundraising committees or because you get a lot of cable news time.

I'm on the Agriculture Committee and the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. And I worked hard to get on those committees because they were committees where you routinely have bipartisanship, where there is a tradition and a culture of bipartisanship. There are food fight committees. I understand there are deep seated partisan divides

in this country. I certainly have very conservative personal views and I'm willing to vociferously advocate for them. Again, I just try to do that without fear and anger because I don't think it's productive. And so ag and transportation are areas where I can channel my worldview about what the proper role of the federal government should be in our economy, in our lives. And I can find thoughtful people on the other side of the aisle who are willing to hear me out rather than just try to turn my sound bite into something they will post on social media. I think that with regard to other committees, I absolutely think the approach that we've

taken here could be a guide for how to operate other committees. It's the idea of not seeing in other people which jersey they're wearing, which political affiliation attaches to them, but rather approaching each individual as a member of our collective team, where we kind of say, look, what, you know, Dusty, what are your concerns on this topic? Here are mine. Do you share my concerns? Do you share my goals here? Okay, well, we have, I have five, you have four. Okay, we have an overlap of two or three. Why don't we build from those two or three and then go from there?

I routinely see on other committees, the majority basically rams down the throat of the minority, its preferences for witnesses, its preferences for the focus of the hearing, it's preferences for how bills are gonna get marked up or which bills are gonna get marked up. Marked up means voted on. And so we think on the select committee,

we've really adopted a little more of a style where, okay, well, what if we were in the minority or what if we were on the other side? How would we wanna be treated? It's almost like the golden rule of legislating and golden rule of committee operation. Treat the other side as though, in the way in which you would wanna be treated.

I think that is really, that if somehow we could bottle that up and share it with other committees, I guarantee you the results would be different. We're speaking with Republican Dusty Johnson of South Dakota and Democrat Raja Krishnamurthy of Illinois. This is Let's Find Common Ground. I'm Richard. I'm Ashley. I'm Ashleigh. We've mentioned in our interview that both Representatives Krishnamoorthy and Johnson get high ratings on the current Common Ground Scorecard.

But what is the Common Ground Scorecard and how does it measure performance? How do members of Congress get those ratings? The Scorecard rates presidential candidates, all members of Congress get those ratings? The scorecard rates presidential candidates, all members of Congress in the House and Senate, as well as governors. Each politician gets a score based on their performance and commitment to finding common ground. With these ratings, you can really tell the difference

between someone who digs in their heels to score points with hardcore supporters of their own party and politicians who collaborate and reach out to the other side. You can learn a lot more about the process, as well as the performance of your own senators and representatives, at commongroundscorecard.org. Some score highly, others definitely do not. Learn more at commongroundscorecard.org. Now back to our interview. Are there any especially contentious issues in Congress where the two of you see opportunities to find common ground? I do. I think it will be hard.

And I'm not sure that these issues that I'll mention are ripe yet. But I think we need thoughtful people to stay at the table and keep working on them so that when there is a ripening in the broader environment, we're ready to strike. I think most Americans, probably the overwhelming majority, would acknowledge that it is too easy to get into this country

illegally and too hard to get here legally. Immigration is the secret sauce to American exceptionalism for 247 years. It is just this beautiful and sacred blessing to our country and we're not getting it right. It's holding us back. I just, I crave for an environment where we can address both halves of that issue and do it well and do it in a thoughtful way and do it in a way that increases prosperity and security and American exceptionalism. I agree.

I'm an immigrant. I'm one of the few naturalized citizens in Congress. I was born in India and grew up in Peoria, Illinois, of all places. I agree with Dusty, that's an area that's ripe for bipartisanship. I think another area where we can think about how do we operate in a more bipartisan way is just the way that we talk about our federal spending priorities and revenue generation. It's way too politicized right now. And I'm a former small business person. I like to say I signed the front of the check and the back of the check. And so it was a foreign concept when I first got involved in politics that every single issue with regard to spending or taxes has

to be politicized. And that doesn't make any sense. We have to live within our means. We have to keep promises we make, but don't make promises we can't keep. And that's just basic stuff that families and businesses know that we need to bring to Washington as well. The beating up of the other side that is so prevalent today, the toxic polarization that you both talked about and talked against, what does that do to trust and to the reputation

of Congress? And how much is it holding up progress? Listen, the two political parties have an unwellness at their extremes. And so in any given day, there can be something that a Democrat or a Republican officeholder says that is just way beyond the pale, that is clearly worth having decent people criticize. And so, yeah, listen, there is a role for us in calling out that kind of insanity or extremism on the other side of the aisle. The issue is that it's also a rabbit hole. It's every day, right? Every day a Republican and a Democrat say or do something stupid. I don't know that

it really helps us govern a country to spend so much time on pointing out how many knuckleheads the other side has. But it's a balancing act admittedly. Some behavior is worth publicly condemning. We have to call out extreme behavior because we are also setting norms. But I think some people kind of make a business of it. That's their currency, their stock and trade, whatever you want to call it. That's they go online and they decide a snarky tweet is going to get a lot of clicks, going to get, going to make them viral. Attention seeking is kind of at the heart of their,

their why for being here. It's a great way to get attention. That's a very empty meal for me. It doesn't make any sense at the end of the day. And trust me, the closest thing that I've had to being viral is I had COVID some time ago, but I still want my office and my operation to be attentive to what my constituents want and they don't want that.

So that's really kind of what guides us. Talk about some ways then to improve public trust in Congress. What are a few things that you think could be done? What we've got now is a feedback loop, right? I mean, ultimately, primary voters on both sides of the aisle seem more interested in anger. I mean, all things created equal, you're way more likely to win your primary if you're the angrier of the two candidates.

They send that message not only to the politicians, but also to media outlets. So you are more likely to have people coming back if you trade in that kind of fear and anger-tainment. And so I'm sure we can blame the politicians, but if we want to change the quality of the civic discourse in this country, we need more normals to get re-engaged at a very high level in their political parties and in their communities and start to vote for and support institutions and media outlets that bring responsible reporting and responsible behavior. I mean, ultimately, it's more fun to criticize the politicians and media outlets, it is, but they will just respond to incentives in the system. So we have to demand more from voters and consumers of

information. I think another part of it as well is I think we in Congress, we have to get back to addressing some kitchen table topics that enable people to continue to climb the ladder of economic prosperity. And what do I mean by that? I think a long time ago, with globalization, with a technology revolution that we've seen, unfortunately, a growing number of Americans have been left behind. I think that government has not done enough to make sure that folks get the educational opportunities or the ability to cope with the changes that have engulfed our economy, and not just ours, but the global economy. And as a consequence, when Washington and government is not acting to help people to keep up,

and people are starting to say that they fear that their children are gonna have a future that is worse than theirs economically, I think that they're left with, I'm reminded of that old Native American saying, which is, in each of us is a good wolf and a bad wolf, and the wolf you become is the wolf you feed. And so they become susceptible to being fed,

their bad wolves being fed by certain people who will point to this individual over there or this type of person over there as the reason for their economic plight, as opposed to trying to appeal to their better angels and trying to figure out how do I solve the fundamental economic and educational challenges facing that family or that person?

And how do I get them back on the economic ladder, on the up escalator of the economy? That to me is the fundamental dilemma facing our government right now. Unless and until we do that, we don't regain the trust of the American people that we can actually solve their economic problems. And if we can't solve their economic problems,

what are we here for? That's my antidote. I feel like the more that I'm focused on that, those set of challenges, the more I can get at that underlying trust deficit. Dusty and Raja, what gives you hope? When I look at developments outside of government, I find it very easy to be hopeful. There are researchers and there are entrepreneurs and there are innovators and there are engineers. I mean it is amazing how much of a transformation that we are undergoing. And they're cute funny buzzwords and we know they come with a lot of threats and AI this

and quantum that. But ultimately, the dysfunction in government does bleed over into a broader society. And yet, despite that burden, we still have a really, really robust marketplace of ideas in this country and elsewhere. And to the extent that smart people deliver real value for families and businesses and communities, it's so much more likely to come from outside of government right now than

from inside government. I think what gives me hope is, you know, my family, when we first came to this country, unfortunately, my father lost his employment. I lived in public housing and food stamps for about half of my early childhood. But then this government, thanks to the generosity of the American people, my father was allowed to stay and complete his studies and then get a great job in Peoria, Illinois. Pretty much every night at the dinner table, my father would say, think of the greatness of this country. And whatever the two of you do, my brother and me,

just make sure this country is there for the next families who need it. That life mission that my parents gave to me became kind of my North Star. My personal story has been repeated millions of times at this point in America. That is the American dream. And seeing other people live their American dream gives me hope every day that we can we can enable it to happen again. When it happens millions of times I feel like

we can replicate it. That's what gives me hope millions of times, I feel like we can replicate it. That's what gives me hope. That's what keeps me going. I don't mean to get spiritual, but that's why God put me on this planet, to make sure that I could pay that story forward for the next immigrant, for the next family who's down on their luck and needs a helping hand

to get up and fight and and climb the ladder so they can do it again for someone else. I still will bet my last dollar on America and no one ever lost betting on America. Raja Krishnamurti, Dusty Johnson, thanks so much for coming on Let's Find Common Ground with us today. Thank you. Thank you, Dusty. See you later. Representatives Dusty Johnson and Rajah Krishnamurthy. One of the most interesting things to us is not only what they said, but how they said it. Yeah, it was pretty clear that both of them had a lot of respect for each other and for some other members of the opposing party, which is kind of a refreshing contrast to the divisive partisan rhetoric we hear so much of in the media.

That's just about it for this episode of Let's Find Common Ground. Hear more examples of people working across divides at our website, commongroundcommittee.org. And if you want to help us make more new episodes of our podcast, text to donate on your smartphone. Text to this number, 53555, and then tap in the letter CGC. That's 53555, and then CGC. I'm Ashley Miltite. I'm Richard Davies. Thanks for listening. This podcast is part of the Democracy Group.