After more than a week of heated debates over a potential change in the Senate dress code, the Senate came to an agreement: Suit jackets and slacks are here to stay, but is it for the best?
On Sept. 18, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that the Senate would no longer be enforcing a dress code on the floor. This decision was likely inspired by Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman as he frequently had to vote from doorways as his clothing decisions, like wearing shorts, prevented him from being on the Senate floor.
This relaxed dress code decision outraged Democratic and Republican senators alike, with many arguing that dressing casual is disrespectful to constituents. Their concerns were addressed on Sept. 27, when the Senate passed a resolution that requires business attire to be worn on the floor, which, according to the resolution document, means men must wear a coat, tie and slacks. Although senators believe that they owe their constituents formality, is it even something that citizens value?
As a culture, we have been straying away from dress codes and embracing more casual wear in our daily lives. In K-12 schools, students are less likely to be given uniforms or forced to wear polos and slacks. At work, it has been more common to wear jeans and leggings instead of a dress or a suit. In universities, students have been going so far with casual dress that they wear slippers and pajama pants to class.
We are not only just embracing casual wear, but we are taking it one step further by actively opposing restrictive dress codes. Many argue that dress codes are outdated. Others believe dress codes are discriminatory in some way as they may not be equally enforced, commonly with women’s appearances being overly policed. Although this likely not the case in the Senate considering there were not even specific attire regulations for women mentioned in the resolution document, the point remains: many people do not like being told what to wear.
If, as a culture, we are slowly embracing more casual dress – even in the workplace and other formal settings – and are beginning to oppose attire regulations, it seems silly to be so concerned about the Senate dress code, especially if senators would likely continue to wear business professional attire regardless of whether there was a rule in place.
This is not to say that I do not believe that politicians owe constituents respect and consideration. It is quite the opposite. I just do not see appearance as all that important in determining whether someone may be an effective and considerate representative.
In the case of Fetterman, as someone who is his constituent, his appearance and casual clothing choices have always been a nonissue to me. If anything, I think it is refreshing to see a politician not only act as if he is an average citizen but to look like one, too.
Further, I thought it would be interesting to see how senators would present themselves if there were no boundaries. Potentially, they could wear something to make a political statement. Maybe there would be changes in our perceptions of what a senator can look like. Or, the most likely option, senators would continue to dress in business attire anyways and all the outrage would be over nothing.
All the energy that has gone into deciding whether senators should have a dress code could have been better directed elsewhere. If they are anything like me, U.S. citizens have bigger concerns they want to be addressed by the Senate than whether they should have a dress code. Time spent on something so trivial is time wasted.
