Menus Subscribe Search

Follow us


What Makes Us Politic

sotu-address

2011 State of the Union Address given by President Barack Obama. (Photo: Public Domain)

The State of the Union: When Style Is Substance

• January 27, 2014 • 10:00 AM

2011 State of the Union Address given by President Barack Obama. (Photo: Public Domain)

During tomorrow night’s presidential address, actions will speak louder than words. With highly polarized parties at least through 2016, it’s not like any of Obama’s proposals are about to become law any time soon anyway.

This Tuesday night brings us President Obama’s fifth State of the Union address. For the record, my two favorite political media spectacles are SOTUs and election nights. Yet those are very different sorts of events. On election nights, we get data (votes and exit polls), and we hear pundits and politicians attempting (often poorly) to impose narratives on them. By contrast, the SOTU is all narrative. Pundits will attempt to graft some data onto it—approval ratings, snap polls, word counts, word clouds—but really, the story of the night is the pageantry.

Jonathan Bernstein has observed that media coverage of the State of the Union usually has it wrong, focusing on the president’s abilities to manipulate public opinion and set a tone for upcoming elections. In fact, as John Sides notes, the president has very little ability to change people’s opinions through a SOTU or any other speech. Oh, and given that we’re likely to have continued divided government and highly polarized parties at least through 2016, it’s not like any of Obama’s proposals are about to become law any time soon. What we should be focusing on is the ritual itself.

This year, Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state will deliver the official response for the Republican Party—a clear attempt to impress female voters and introduce a promising legislator to the national scene.

Political scientist Clinton Rossiter famously described the president as “the ceremonial head of the government of the United States, the leader of the rituals of American democracy.” And the SOTU is one of those premier rituals. A State of the Union address is basically the only time where all the principal members of every branch of the federal government are together under one roof. The president and vice president, their spouses, the cabinet, the entire Congress, the Supreme Court, a large swathe of journalists, and a variety of distinguished guests can all be viewed at the same time.

The main part of the ritual is the very public interplay between the president and the Congress. Yes, it’s the president’s speech, but it’s not his event; Congress hosts it, and their responses to his pronouncements are at least as important as the pronouncements themselves. When all the Democrats stand and applaud while all the Republicans sit on their hands, that’s useful information to the home audience. It’s also useful to know when something is universally supported, or when a party seems split in its support for one of the president’s initiatives. As Dan Amira notes, it was regrettable when some members of Congress started sitting together across party lines a few years ago, as this muted the valuable party messaging. But it’s interesting to see who sits next to whom.

Matt Glassman had a memorable post about the SOTU a few years ago, noting that, while it’s a presidential speech, the event is all about congressional superiority:

What he says may or may not matter, but the way in which he says it sure does. He does not tell the legislature what he is going to do in the following year, for there is very little he can do. He tells the legislature what he believes needs to be done, and then he asks the legislature to do it. In the endless string of presidential debates it can often feel like the President has the ability to wave his hand and enact a policy. But the State of the Union Address reminds everyone that the President of the United States can no more make a law than he can walk on water; never is it more evident how our system of government works. The President comes and visits the Representatives of the people, and he pleads with them to do what he thinks is right for the country.

Finally, we get a useful bit of symbolism at the end of the president’s address when the Republicans will offer a response. Again, the precise content of this response only matters marginally, and it will likely be a restatement of the basic party principles of low taxes and distrust toward government action. But how those ideas are expressed, and by whom, are relevant. This year, Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state will deliver the official response for the Republican Party—a clear attempt to impress female voters and introduce a promising legislator to the national scene. Yet Senator Mike Lee of Utah will deliver a response on behalf of the Tea Party Express, and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky will deliver one, as well. These SOTU responses may or may not differ substantively from each other, but the fact that there are three of them speaks volumes.

Seth Masket
Seth Masket is a political scientist at the University of Denver, specializing in political parties, state legislatures, campaigns and elections, and social networks. He is the author of No Middle Ground: How Informal Party Organizations Control Nominations and Polarize Legislatures (University of Michigan Press, 2009). Follow him on Twitter @smotus.

More From Seth Masket

A weekly roundup of the best of Pacific Standard and PSmag.com, delivered straight to your inbox.

Recent Posts

October 30 • 10:00 AM

Sky’s the Limit: The Case for Selling Air Rights

Lower taxes and debt, increased revenue for the city, and a much better use of space in already dense environments: Selling air rights and encouraging upward growth seem like no-brainers, but NIMBY resistance and philosophical barriers remain.


October 30 • 9:00 AM

Cycles of Fear and Bias in the Criminal Justice System

Exploring the psychological roots of racial disparity in U.S. prisons.


October 30 • 8:00 AM

How Do You Make a Living, Email Newsletter Writer?

Noah Davis talks to Wait But Why writer Tim Urban about the newsletter concept, the research process, and escaping “money-flushing toilet” status.



October 30 • 6:00 AM

Dreamers of the Carbon-Free Dream

Can California go full-renewable?


October 30 • 5:08 AM

We’re Not So Great at Rejecting Each Other

And it’s probably something we should work on.


October 30 • 4:00 AM

He’s Definitely a Liberal—Just Check Out His Brain Scan

New research finds political ideology can be easily determined by examining how one’s brain reacts to disgusting images.


October 29 • 4:00 PM

Should We Prosecute Climate Change Protesters Who Break the Law?

A conversation with Bristol County, Massachusetts, District Attorney Sam Sutter, who dropped steep charges against two climate change protesters.


October 29 • 2:23 PM

Innovation Geography: The Beginning of the End for Silicon Valley

Will a lack of affordable housing hinder the growth of creative start-ups?


October 29 • 2:00 PM

Trapped in the Tobacco Debt Trap

A refinance of Niagara County, New York’s tobacco bonds was good news—but for investors, not taxpayers.


October 29 • 12:00 PM

Purity and Self-Mutilation in Thailand

During the nine-day Phuket Vegetarian Festival, a group of chosen ones known as the mah song torture themselves in order to redirect bad luck and misfortune away from their communities and ensure a year of prosperity.


October 29 • 10:00 AM

Can Proposition 47 Solve California’s Problem With Mass Incarceration?

Reducing penalties for low-level felonies could be the next step in rolling back draconian sentencing laws and addressing the criminal justice system’s long legacy of racism.


October 29 • 9:00 AM

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and the Brain

Neuroscientists find less—but potentially stronger—white matter in the brains of patients with CFS.


October 29 • 8:00 AM

America’s Bathrooms Are a Total Failure

No matter which American bathroom is crowned in this year’s America’s Best Restroom contest, it will still have a host of terrible flaws.



October 29 • 6:00 AM

Tell Us What You Really Think

In politics, are we always just looking out for No. 1?


October 29 • 4:00 AM

Racial Resentment Drives Tea Party Membership

New research finds a strong link between tea party membership and anti-black feelings.


October 28 • 4:00 PM

The New Health App on Apple’s iOS 8 Is Literally Dangerous

Design isn’t neutral. Design is a picture of inequality, of systems of power, and domination both subtle and not. Apple should know that.


October 28 • 2:00 PM

And You Thought Your Credit Card Debt Was Bad

In Niagara County, New York, leaders took on 40-year debt to pay for short-term stuff, a case study in the perverse incentives tobacco bonds create.



October 28 • 10:00 AM

How Valuable Is It to Cure a Disease?

It depends on the disease—for some, breast cancer and AIDS for example, non-curative therapy that can extend life a little or a lot is considered invaluable. For hepatitis C, it seems that society and the insurance industry have decided that curative therapy simply costs too much.


October 28 • 8:00 AM

Can We Read Our Way Out of Sadness?

How books can help save lives.



October 28 • 6:15 AM

Incumbents, Pray for Rain

Come next Tuesday, rain could push voters toward safer, more predictable candidates.


October 28 • 6:00 AM

Why Women Are Such a Minority in Elected Office

The obvious answers aren’t necessarily the most accurate. Here, five studies help clear up the gender disparity in politics.


Follow us


We’re Not So Great at Rejecting Each Other

And it's probably something we should work on.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and the Brain

Neuroscientists find less—but potentially stronger—white matter in the brains of patients with CFS.

Incumbents, Pray for Rain

Come next Tuesday, rain could push voters toward safer, more predictable candidates.

Could Economics Benefit From Computer Science Thinking?

Computational complexity could offer new insight into old ideas in biology and, yes, even the dismal science.

Politicians Really Aren’t Better Decision Makers

Politicians took part in a classic choice experiment but failed to do better than the rest of us.

The Big One

One town, Champlain, New York, was the source of nearly half the scams targeting small businesses in the United States last year. November/December 2014

Copyright © 2014 by Pacific Standard and The Miller-McCune Center for Research, Media, and Public Policy. All Rights Reserved.