logo
This Former Congressman Survived Political Violence. He Carried a Gun ‘To Fire Back.'

This Former Congressman Survived Political Violence. He Carried a Gun ‘To Fire Back.'

Politico7 hours ago

In the aftermath of the assassination of Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman over the weekend, members of Congress are increasingly worried about their safety and how to better protect themselves in a toxic political environment.
Former Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) is the rare figure who has been both a victim of political violence and a key player in overseeing the protection of elected officials. A survivor of the 2017 congressional baseball shooting where Majority Leader Steve Scalise was badly wounded — Davis was at home plate when the gunman opened fire from behind third base — the former Illinois congressman later became the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, which oversees security arrangements for members of the House of Representatives.
Davis, who now serves as a head of government affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, lost his 2022 primary after redistricting put him in the same district as his Donald Trump-endorsed Republican colleague, Mary Miller.
As a result of the congressional shooting — which happened precisely eight years to the day of Hortman's death — the former Illinois congressman says he now carries a gun when he can 'in order to fire back if somebody decides to come and kill me and my friends again.'
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
What was your reaction to hearing about the shooting in Minnesota especially given that it was the eight-year anniversary of the congressional baseball shooting?
It brings back the memories of that day and watching my friends and wondering whether or not they were going to survive their shots. But at the same time, you begin to understand that there are just some bad people out there that are triggered for whatever reason, that they're going to save the world by killing others. And I don't get it. Never got it that day, never got it afterwards, and I still don't understand it today in Minnesota.
How did the shooting change how you dealt with constituents and appearing in public for events?
Well, it changed me personally. Even in private events, where I'm much more secure, I carry a gun, where I am able to, in order to fire back if somebody decides to come and kill me and my friends again. I'm much more aware of the security situation. I'm sitting here in London right now and working with the security officials that are on this trip that I'm a part of. And I always find myself walking at the end or watching our surroundings. I didn't pay as much attention to that before June 14 of 2017, but I do now.
How much does the congressional baseball shooting serve as a dividing line for your service in Congress?
Well, it was more of a divider immediately afterward, because the tension for Republicans in targeted districts like mine during the 2018 cycle was so immense. But then, you know, the tension went down with COVID and went down in 2022, so you don't think about it as much. But I'm a big believer in the Second Amendment, and, in my old district, I exercised my rights to be able to carry a firearm to protect myself and people wouldn't know it. I did not do that before the baseball shooting but I never wanted to feel like I couldn't fire back again.
I've talked to one of your former colleagues who said he had to wear a bulletproof vest before appearing in a parade. Did things ever reach that level for you?
I never had to do that, but I was more aware of security, and we would coordinate with local law enforcement a lot more when we did events, especially during the heightened tension of 2017 and 2018. Then, ironically, the tension went down in a presidential race. I never understood that, other than COVID, when people weren't out as much, but it just seems to me that the political atmosphere determines the security risk. And that's unfortunate, and that's what we have to address.
How do you handle this practically since it's hard to give every member of Congress their own security detail?
There are ways that member offices can work with local law enforcement to have flexibility to pay for security when there are more high-risk events. I never felt insecure going out to dinner in my hometown of Taylorville, Illinois. So I wouldn't have needed a security detail there. But parades in certain areas of the district, or more of a public town hall type of event, we were more cognizant of the security needs. But it doesn't negate the fact that you have, as a public official, threats on your lives that never get publicity. My wife would come home from work, and the kids would come home from school when I was in office, and they would immediately call me and say, 'Dad. Why is there a sheriff's car parked in front of the house?'
'Yeah, somebody threatened to blow Dad's head off again today. So I'm making sure you guys have some protection if this is serious.'
Now, those are the types of things that really have an impact on families, that have an impact on people wanting to serve in office and that, to me, is the key fact that goes unnoticed.
After the shooting, you became the top Republican on the House Administration Committee. How big of an issue was member security for you in that position?
It's a major issue for us. We wanted to address every security issue there was. And in my case, anytime I would have a threat, we would have the Capitol Police work with local law enforcement, and local law enforcement would take care of things back home.
I never had a detail based on my threats. While I was in DC, my threats were always at home, and there's a gentleman who threatened to blow my head off one morning after clearly a night of drinking that now he has a felony on his record. Because another aspect of this is you have to prosecute those who make stupid decisions to actually deter stupid decisions, and no one ever threatened to blow my head off again after somebody got a felony on their record and it was publicized.
You can have all the security in the world. But at the same time, we have to remember things are different back home, and that's where that coordination between the Capitol Police and local law enforcement has to be seamless, and that's where I think we can do a better job to make that happen in the future.
And is that on Capitol Police, local law enforcement or members to make that work?
It's everyone. I mean, when you think about it, there are plenty of times where I never would have thought a threat would have existed back home, because it's home. And after the baseball shooting, we became more aware. And you know, local law enforcement was more than willing to help, and you have to be able to make that coordinated effort.
How much does dealing with security matter versus dealing with the political environment that has produced such an increase in threats and violence?
We have to deal with the environment. I mean, you know, when you have a CEO of a company like United Healthcare assassinated in New York, you can't have politicians like [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren saying, 'You know, it's a tragedy. But.'
There shouldn't be this immediate reaction, 'Oh, wait, I'm okay with this because I wear a red shirt,' or 'I'm okay with this because I wear a blue shirt.' And that's the message that I tried to send immediately after the baseball shooting when I got back to the Capitol that day. And the message was we have to stop villainizing everyone, Republicans or Democrats.
We have to do what we can as former elected officials or elected officials to be able to call that out, regardless if they're on your team or not.
Is it possible to do that at this point?
There's no other option.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What we learned from Ted Cruz vs. Tucker Carlson
What we learned from Ted Cruz vs. Tucker Carlson

CNN

time29 minutes ago

  • CNN

What we learned from Ted Cruz vs. Tucker Carlson

CNN — When Sen. Ted Cruz went on Tucker Carlson's Fox News show in 2022, he was there to make amends. The Texas Republican's offense was having called the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol a 'violent terrorist attack.' This kind of view was quickly falling out of favor as Donald Trump moved to sanitize January 6. So Cruz disowned what he had said the day before to a cable host who had just savaged him for it. It was a stunning scene: a US senator feeling compelled to grovel to a cable TV host who had targeted him for saying January 6 was very bad. But it epitomized the MAGA zeitgeist and shifting power dynamics, in which extreme enforcers like Carlson had to be appeased. Three years later, Cruz this week joined Carlson on Carlson's own network for a very different purpose – but also one that recognized the former Fox anchor's heft on the right. This time, Cruz was there to try and marginalize a man who is suddenly a big problem for the Trump administration. Carlson has criticized the Trump-backed Israeli strikes on Iran and strongly opposes the US joining in those strikes, which Trump is increasingly considering. Carlson's opposition had already earned a sharp comment from the president, who called him ' kooky Tucker Carlson.' Cruz was there to argue that maybe this guy that he and other Republicans have been so solicitous of is indeed a crank. After two hours of jousting over foreign policy, it became clear Cruz was trying to paint Carlson as isolationist, amoral, anti-Trump and soft on Russian President Vladimir Putin. He also quite strongly suggested Carlson might be an antisemite – a charge Carlson rejected. After Carlson spent much of the first 40 minutes pressing Cruz on his support for Israel and the support he had received from members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee – which Carlson sought to cast as a 'foreign lobby' – Cruz finally went there. 'By the way, Tucker, it's a very weird thing, the obsession with Israel,' Cruz said, noting Carlson hadn't inquired about foreign lobbying from other countries. 'Oh, I'm an antisemite now?' Carlson shot back. 'You're asking the questions Tucker,' Cruz said. 'You're asking, why are the Jews controlling our foreign policy. That's what you just asked.' Carlson accused Cruz of trying to derail his questions by playing the antisemitism card. 'That does not make me an antisemite, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise,' Carlson said. The exchange evoked growing concerns in some corners of the right over Carlson's commentary and programming on Israel and Jewish people. Last year, for example, even some Republicans criticized Carlson for hosting a conversation with a Holocaust revisionist. Carlson said the man 'may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.' This week's interview got no less heated from there. Cruz repeatedly pointed to allegations from the US government that Iran has targeted Trump for assassination, a case in which the Justice Department under then-President Joe Biden brought charges last year. Cruz was trying to tie going after Iran to loyalty to Trump. This led Carlson to question that narrative about Iran targeting Trump, and Cruz again pounced. 'Did we land on the moon? What other conspiracies to you believe? Was 9/11 an inside job?' Cruz said. He added that 'even the looniest Democrat doesn't dispute that.' Cruz accused Carlson of having more or less the foreign policy of Jimmy Carter. 'Oh absolutely, I'm a big leftist,' Carlson responded sarcastically. 'This is so silly.' Cruz went on to ask Carlson if Putin was the United States' enemy. Carlson said Russia was technically our enemy by virtue of the US government's support for Ukraine, but he resisted making a moral judgment. 'I don't want to be enemies with Russia. It doesn't help us at all,' Carlson said. 'It may help some people in the United States, but in general, I don't want to be.' Cruz pointed to another infamous episode involving Carlson and Russia, when Carlson filmed a video in a Russian grocery store in which he fawned over the facility and its offerings. (Even a participant in an alleged Russian influence operation apparently regarded Carlson's video as 'overt shilling.') 'It was just weird,' Cruz said. 'It was like a promo video for Russia.' Carlson got his licks in too. In addition to painting Cruz as too focused on supporting Israel, he ridiculed the senator for not being able to quantify the population of Iran and provide a citation for a specific verse of the Bible he referenced. But after the interview posted, Cruz was quite happy to post a multitude of clips. He said Carlson was 'running interference' for Trump's would-be assassins. He said Carlson was 'obsessed with defending Russia and the KGB thug that runs it.' He promoted someone who praised him for calling out Carlson's 'thinly veiled antisemitism.' And perhaps most tellingly, the Senate Republican Conference on its own feed promoted a bunch of the same content intended to ding Carlson. That would seem to signal this is a concerted GOP effort to deal with a perceived problem. It remains to be seen whether it works. But it's a remarkable turnabout from where things were three years ago. Carlson has been saying these kinds of things for years, but they – and his commentary on Iran – are increasingly political problems for Trump's party that apparently must be dealt with.

North Carolina lawmakers finalize bill that would scrap 2030 carbon reduction goal

time43 minutes ago

North Carolina lawmakers finalize bill that would scrap 2030 carbon reduction goal

RALEIGH, N.C. -- North Carolina legislators finalized a bill Thursday that would eliminate an interim greenhouse gas reduction mandate set in a landmark 2021 law, while still directing regulators to aim to cancel out power plant carbon emissions in the state within the next 25 years. With some bipartisan support, the state Senate voted to accept the House version that would repeal the 2021 law's requirement that electric regulators take 'all reasonable steps to achieve' reducing carbon dioxide output 70% from 2005 levels by 2030. The law's directive to take similar steps to meet a carbon neutrality standard by 2050 would remain in place. The bill's Republican supporters pushing the new measure say getting rid of the interim goal benefits ratepayers asked to pay for future electric-production construction and is more efficient for Duke Energy, the state's dominant electric utility. The bill now goes to Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, who can veto the measure, sign it or let it become law without his signature. Stein previously expressed concerns about the Senate version of the measure, worried that it could hurt electricity users and threaten the state's clean-energy economy. His office didn't immediately provide comment after Thursday's vote. With over a dozen House and Senate Democrats voting for the final version, the chances that any Stein veto could be overridden are higher. Republicans in charge of the General Assembly are only one House seat shy of a veto-proof majority. The bill also contains language that would help Duke Energy seek higher electric rates to cover financing costs to build nuclear or gas-powered plants incrementally, rather than wait until the project's end. The 2021 greenhouse gas law marked a rare agreement on environmental issues by then-Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper and Republican lawmakers. At least 17 other states — most controlled by Democrats — have laws setting similar net-zero power plant emissions or 100% renewable energy targets, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. North Carolina and Virginia are the only ones from the Southeast. The legislation came about as President Donald Trump's administration has proposed rolling back federal environmental and climate change policies, which critics say could boost pollution and threaten human health. Republicans are promoting them as ways to reduce the cost of living and boost the economy. The state Utilities Commission, which regulates rates and services for public utilities, already has pushed back the 2030 deadline — as the 2021 law allows — by at least four years. The panel acknowledged last year it was 'no longer reasonable or executable' for Duke Energy to meet the reduction standard by 2030. Bill supporters say to meet the goal would require expensive types of alternate energy immediately. If the interim standard can be bypassed, GOP bill authors say, Duke Energy can assemble less expensive power sources now and moderate electricity rate increases necessary to reach the 2050 standard. 'Our residents shouldn't be saddled with higher power bills to satisfy arbitrary targets,' Republican Senate leader Phil Berger said in a news release after the vote. Citing an analysis performed by a state agency that represents consumers before the commission, GOP lawmakers say removing the interim goal would reduce by at least $13 billion what Duke Energy would have to spend — and pass on to customers — in the next 25 years. Bill opponents question the savings figure given uncertainty in plant fuel prices, energy demand and construction costs. They say the interim goal still holds an aspirational purpose and was something that Duke Energy had agreed in 2021 to meet. Provisions in the measure related to recouping plant construction expenses over time would reduce accumulated borrowing interest. Environmental groups argue the financing option would benefit Duke Energy's bottom line on expensive projects even if they're never completed, and the bill broadly would prevent cleaner energy sources from coming online sooner. They also contend another bill section would shift costs to residential customers. 'This bill is bad for all North Carolinians, whether they're Duke Energy customers or simply people who want to breathe clean air,' North Carolina Sierra Club director Chris Herndon said after the vote while urging Stein to veto the measure. Bill support came from the North Carolina Chamber and a manufacturers' group, in addition to Duke Energy. 'We appreciate bipartisan efforts by policymakers to keep costs as low as possible for customers and enable the always-on energy resources our communities need,' the company said this week.

GOP lawmaker says he was ‘run off the road' by man with Palestinian flag
GOP lawmaker says he was ‘run off the road' by man with Palestinian flag

Politico

timean hour ago

  • Politico

GOP lawmaker says he was ‘run off the road' by man with Palestinian flag

Rep. Max Miller said on Thursday that he was 'run off the road' by an aggressor with a Palestinian flag in his home state of Ohio, drawing condemnations from across the aisle. The Ohio Republican recounted the incident in a post to his account on X on Thursday afternoon, saying that a driver ran his car off the road and threatened the congressmember and his family, before he 'proceeded to show a Palestinian flag' and drove away. 'The deranged hatred in this country has gotten out of control. Today I was run off the road in Rocky River, and the life of me and my family was threatened by a person who proceeded to show a Palestinian flag before taking off,' Miller wrote in the post, saying that he had filed a police report with both the Capitol Police and the local Ohio station. 'We know who this person is and he will face justice,' Miller added but did not identify the alleged assailant. Miller, who is Jewish and is a self-described 'staunch defender of Israel,' decried the incident as an act of antisemitism. 'We will not hide,' Miller said in a video appended to the post. 'And I will continue to fight against antisemitism, Islamophobia and all other forms of hate.' The incident comes as tensions run high amid an increasing number of politically motivated attacks across the political spectrum. Just last weekend, two Democratic Minnesota state lawmakers and their spouses were shot in their homes, leaving two dead and two seriously injured. House Democratic leadership was quick to denounce the incident, tying it to a 'rise in political violence' in the country. 'We condemn in the strongest possible terms the attack on Congressman Max Miller and his family and are thankful they are safe,' the statement by Reps. Hakeem Jeffries, Katherine Clark and Pete Aguilar read. 'The rise in political violence in this country is unacceptable.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store