Why changes to clothing norms are a point of contention on Capitol Hill

Read the Full Transcript

• Geoff Bennett:

  It's the other debate playing out in the halls of Congress, not about government funding, but about clothing, what with the Senate loosening a longstanding tradition requiring business attire in the Upper Chamber.

  Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman, known for wearing shorts and hooded sweatshirts around the Capitol, appreciates the change, but many others do not.

  A group of Republican senators wrote to the majority leader that — quote — "Allowing casual clothing on the Senate floor disrespects the institution we serve and the American families we represent."

  Some Democratic senators are openly objecting to the change as well.

  Here to discuss the change and what it means is Richard Thompson Ford. He's a professor at Stanford Law School and the author of "Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History."

  Thank you for being with us.

  Richard Thompson Ford, Author, "Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History": Thanks for having me on the show.

• Geoff Bennett:

  In response to the relaxed dress code, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, she first joked that she was going to wear a bikini on the Senate floor.

  But then she added: "I think there's a certain dignity that we should be maintaining in the Senate. And to do away with the dress code debases the institution."

  How do you see it?

• Richard Thompson Ford:

  Well, I see it as a change that's reflecting changes in society.

  It's been — for many years, norms of dress have been getting more casual, starting perhaps with the Silicon Valley out, where I live, but it's spread around the nation to banks and law firms. And so I can't say I'm surprised that it's now come to the United States Congress.

• Geoff Bennett:

  The dress codes and norms of Congress, as you mentioned, they have evolved over the years.

  Back in 1993, that was when women were allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. It was Senator Barbara Mikulski and Carol Moseley Braun who led the pantsuit rebellion. But, still, senators traditionally stick to business attire, suits for men and dresses or pantsuits for the women.

  Are there limits to the decline of formality and what that conveys?

• Richard Thompson Ford:

  Well, I think there are limits and there should be limits.

  The very tricky question is exactly where those limits lie. And I do want to emphasize that these norms change over time historically, and they have for hundreds of years. Ever since, let's say the late Middle Ages, one can detect a trend of clothing changing over time and generally becoming more casual, so that, even today, the kind of attire that we associate with formality, something like a jacket like this one, was once considered sportswear, suitable only for hunting in the country or playing sports.

  And so this trend is just continuing in the present day.

• Geoff Bennett:

  And before Senator Fetterman arrived in Washington, it was Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema whose attire choices were often the center of debate about appropriateness and so forth.

  Certainly, wearing Carhartt hooded sweatshirts and shorts helped establish Fetterman's political brand. But there are those who argue that at a time when public trust in government is waning, when decorum in Congress is at a low, that attire matters now in a way that it might not have previously.

• Richard Thompson Ford:

  Well, I have some sympathy for that argument.

  And yet, at the same time, the question is, what are people conveying with their attire and what are we conveying with dress codes? It's interesting that you mentioned the role of women, because, historically, norms of professionalism have excluded some groups of people. They have excluded women, or they have made it harder for women to join what were previously all-male institutions.

  And they have made it harder for some other groups as well. So you could make the case that John Fetterman represents a group of Americans in his attire. He's expressing a certain kind of authenticity, a connection with his constituents. And that's why I'm not surprised that this kind of change has happened.

• Geoff Bennett:

  Big picture, COVID changed the way that people dress in the workplace.

  Athleisure, sportswear has now crept into every aspect of American life, for better or for worse. Returning to that question about the demise of formality, where do you see the American public right now, the American culture, writ large?

• Richard Thompson Ford:

  I think you're quite right to mention COVID.

  We're starting to see a blurring of the lines between workwear and the kind of thing that you wear at home, because half of the workweek for many Americans now is spent at home. So you have the old formal dress codes are kind of under attack from a number of sides.

• Geoff Bennett:

  Richard Thompson Ford, Stanford Law School professor and author of "Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History," thanks for your insights.

• Richard Thompson Ford:

  Thank you.