On the recordJanuary 27, 2011
on Tuesday we made history in a small but significant way here in Congress. When we filed into the House Chamber for the President's annual State of the Union Address, many of us cast aside a long-held custom and crossed the aisle-- literally--and sat together rather than divided by party. In some cases, as with my colleagues from my home State of Colorado, we sat by State delegation, Republicans and Democrats together. I advocated for that change as a symbolic gesture. It was something I have done since I served in the Colorado State House. In the days leading up to Tuesday's speech, folks here, and in the media, had a lot of fun comparing our plans to finding a date to a high school dance. They started speculating on what was next--trust falls? A ropes course? I am an old mountaineer--I have been joking that the aisle has become a mountain to climb. And while those jokes have been entertaining for us inside the beltway, I think the media's interest in the drama highlights part of the problem that led me to call for a change in the way we sit during the State of the Union. My staff did quite a bit of research on the history of the State of the Union Address, and they couldn't find any historical reason for divided seating. It seems to have developed along with the evolution of broadcast journalism.
