You don't say that for a senator to be a great senator he has to vote against his constituency.
I think it's fair to say that there's a lot of conversations between House members and Senate members on a regular basis, and I think that's what our constituents would expect, is to have bicameral conversations throughout the process.
Pity the poor senator or representative trying to stay alive in the political jungle. At every turn, there's a danger: a constituent who actually wants something done. Or worse, a campaign donor who might be offended by that something.
The longest-term thought many people have in D.C. is how can I be sure I don't do anything that so annoys either my base or my general electorate that I might not be able to get my job back? I don't think that's the right way to think about it.
My constituents want me to be outspoken - it's part of the reason they elected me - and the inevitable side effect of being outspoken is that, occasionally, you put your foot in your mouth.
I don't want to make a member of Congress do something that that member of Congress's constituents would not approve of, or would not agree to. So in that regard, I'm kind of the opposite of a lobbyist.
Our constituents did not send us to Washington to shut down the government. They sent us here to make it more accountable.
Most people want their representatives to get something done.
My dad was a congressman, and he taught me at a very early age, 'They voted for me, they view me as theirs, and I am.' Our family's phone in Memphis was always listed. It rang all day and all night.
Leadership is a dynamic tension between where a politician thinks his country must go and where his voters want it to go.
I think people in my district expect me to work with the president. It doesn't mean we have to agree all the time. I don't feel any extra pressure.
