The Corner

Extra Security a Threat to Budget Cuts?

In one of the first acts of the 112th Congress, House members voted last week to cut their annual office budgets by 5 percent (about $35 million). But following the tragic events in Tucson over the weekend, where Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D., Ariz.) was attacked at a “Congress on Your Corner” meet-and-greet event, some members have called for additional security measures.

These proposals would, quite obviously, cost money to implement. In fact, Rep. Jesse Jackson (D., Ill.) said he wants to undo that 5 percent cut and increase members’ office budgets by 10 percent to pay for beefed-up security measures.

Rep. Dan Burton (R., Ind.) said this week he plans to re-introduce legislation that would provide for a Plexiglas shield surrounding the House chamber to protect members from projectiles or explosives hurled by members of the public.

Could these measures garner the support to pass? And if so, would that jeopardize the recently enacted budget cuts? A House GOP aide told National Review Online that it’s premature to speculate at this point, but that party leadership would be mindful moving forward. It’s worth noting that the 5 percent budget cut passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, 410–13, and the overriding sentiment in the wake of the shooting seems to be that restricting access to members of Congress in any way would be the wrong thing to do. It could be more likely that a proposal from Rep. Jack Kingston (R., Ga.) to save money by doing away with security escorts for “lower-level leadership members” will be adopted.

Andrew StilesAndrew Stiles is a political reporter for National Review Online. He previously worked at the Washington Free Beacon, and was an intern at The Hill newspaper. Stiles is a 2009 ...

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More

A Nation of Barbers

It seems almost inevitable that long hair is unwelcome at Barbers Hill High School. There’s a touch of aptronymic poetry in Texas public-school dress-code disputes. When I was in school in the 1980s, at the height of the Satanism panic, the local school-district superintendent circulated a list of ... Read More

A Nation of Barbers

It seems almost inevitable that long hair is unwelcome at Barbers Hill High School. There’s a touch of aptronymic poetry in Texas public-school dress-code disputes. When I was in school in the 1980s, at the height of the Satanism panic, the local school-district superintendent circulated a list of ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More