Welcome to From Insults to Respect. Today we examine a conflict witnessed by millions that involves U.S. Congressman Jim Jordan at a U.S. House Coronavirus Hearing angrily questioning infectious disease expert Dr. Fauci. It can be viewed on YouTube HERE.

The conflict provides a real life event of interest, and not being ourselves embroiled in the immediacy of the situation, we can now reflect somewhat dispassionately at what occurred. We might, for example, upon reflection, come up with a more effective way to handle particular points in the conflict, and then be better prepared when we find ourselves in a similar situation. So, with that in mind, let’s move on to a brief summary of the conflict, look at some of the actual transcript of the two parties engaging during the hearing, and a critique of how the two participants acted.

The Conflict

Briefly, Congressman Jordan desired to defend the U.S. Constitution and the liberty of Americans. In his view, interfering with his desire are a set of recommendations developed by the CDC that Dr. Fauci has given voice to as part of the job the current president has hired him to do. Jordan appears to believe Dr. Fauci is guilty of promoting recommendations that interfere with liberty and the Constitution. At the same time, Dr. Fauci desires to do his job without facing personal attacks and a style of questioning that he referred to as ranting.

As the video of the conflict moves forward, it becomes apparent that Jordan wants Dr. Fauci to describe what objective criteria he will be using to determine when the restrictions on liberty will no longer be necessary. Additionally, he wants Dr. Fauci to tell him how much longer it will be until that criteria is met.

At first, Dr. Fauci is reluctant to describe the objective measure, explaining it depends on a variety of ever changing conditions, such as the percentage of people who will agree to be vaccinated, how resistant new emerging variants of the virus will be to the available vaccines, and other factors that can sprout up. But, after making clear that any estimate that he gives must be viewed as very tentative, Dr. Fauci finally provides his best guess–when the number of daily infections drop to 10,000 a day, which may very well be reached by early to mid summer if the vast majority of people are vaccinated.

Once Dr. Fauci gives his best guess, Jordan, in an apparent effort to suggest that any guess by Dr. Fauci is worthless, said:

You said that when Texas ended their lockdown, ended their mandates, this was inexplicable and this would, quote, “lead to a surge in cases.” But Texas is at the bottom of the 50 states. But all of the states at the top are lockdown states. So, that guess didn’t look too good. What explains why Texas is so darn low as compared to the rest of the states. Lockdown states have a much higher rate than the state of Texas which over a month ago said that we’re not going to have all these lockdowns and all of these mandates that you say we have to have a lockdown.

Dr. Fauci replied:

There’s a difference between lockdowns and the people obeying the lockdown. You know, you can have a situation where they say we’re going to lockdown and yet you have people doing exactly what they want to do.

It is at this point that Jordan’s time for questioning expired. So, now let’s turn to some of the transcript of the conflict that reveals some exchanges between the two parties that I think are worthwhile to critique.

Some Key Conflict Moments

Jordan began his questioning of Dr. Fauci as follows:

Jordan: Dr. Fauci, when is the time? When, in your written statement you say, “Now is not the time to pull back on masking, physical distancing, and avoiding congregating settings. When is the time? When do Americans get their freedom back? 

Dr. Fauci: When we get the levels of infection in this country low enough that it is not a really high threat.

Jordan: What is low enough? Give me a number. I mean, we have had fifteen days to slow the spread that turned into one year of blocked liberty. What metric, what measure, what has to happen before Americans can get their freedom back?

Dr. Fauci: My message, Congressman Jordan, is to get as many people vaccinated as quickly as possible so we can, to get the level of infection in this country low so that it is no longer a threat. That is when, and I believe when that happens you will see…

Jordan, interrupting Fauci: What determines when?

Dr. Fauci: I’m sorry…

Jordan: What measure. I mean, are we just going to continue forever. When do we get to the point? What measure, what objective outcome do we have to reach before Americans get their liberty and freedom back? 

Dr. Fauci: You know, you are indicating liberty and freedom. I look at it as a public health measure that keeps people from dying and going to the hospital.

Up to this point, Congressman Jordan’s questioning had been energetic, but to my ear, reasonably respectful, while Dr. Fauci’s tone was level headed and calm. Now, Jordan turns his tone to one that strikes me as exasperation and disbelief:

Jordan, his voice has become louder: You don’t think that American liberties have been threatened the past year, Dr Fauci? They’ve been assaulted, their liberties have.

Dr. Fauci: I don’t look at this as a liberty thing, Congressman Jordan…

Jordan, interrupting Dr. Fauci: Well, that’s obvious!

Dr. Fauci: …as a public health thing. I disagree with you…

Jordan, again interrupting: You think the Constitution is suspended during a virus, during a pandemic? Certainly not.

Dr. Fauci: This will for sure end when we get the level of infection very low. It is now at such a high level that there is a threat of major surges…

At this point, Jordan again interrupts in the middle of Dr. Fauci’s sentence and begins to list examples of Americans loss of liberty, and among them, he says, “The governor of our third largest state meets with physicians and that video is censored because it dared to disagree with Dr. Fauci, so I just want to know when Americans are going to get their liberties back.”

Dr. Fauci: You know, I don’t think anything was censored because they couldn’t disagree with me. I think you are making this a personal thing and it isn’t.

Jordan: It’s not a personal thing.

Dr. Fauci: No, you are. That is exactly what you are doing.

Jordan: No. Your recommendations carry a lot of weight, Dr. Fauci. We just had the chair of the financial services committee saying she loves you and you’re the greatest thing in the world.

Dr. Fauci: My answers are consistent with [cross talk] may I answer the question please. My recommendations are not a personal recommendation. They are based on the CDC guidance and which are underscored by…

Jordan, interrupting, says: And I’m asking the question, What measures have to be attained before Americans get their first amendment liberties back? 

Dr, Fauci, now sounding clearly annoyed: I just told you that!

Jordan: You haven’t given anything specific. You said we hope, tell me something specific.

Dr. Fauci: Right now we have about sixty thousand infections a day, which is a very large risk for a surge. We’re not talking about liberties, we’re talking about a pandemic that has killed 560,000 Americans. That’s what we are talking about.

Jordan: And I don’t disagree with that. And I understand how serious that is. But I also understand businesses have been shut down, people can’t assemble in their own home with their family, people can’t go to their loved one’s funeral…  [he gives many more examples of loss of liberty] and I want to know when Americans will get their first amendment liberties back.

Dr. Fauci: Well, you just said people can’t assemble in their own homes. They can. That’s a CDC recommendation. [after some crosstalk Dr. Fauci continues] You are going to see a gradual, from, right now we are at an unacceptable high level, regardless of who you are. We’re going to see, as more and more people are vaccinated and we get over three million people a day, you are going to see the level of infection go down and down, and gradually there will be more flexibility to doing the things you are talking about.

Jordan: What number do we get our liberties back? Tell me the number.

Dr. Fauci, after some crosstalk: I can’t give a number.

At this point, Jordan’s time for questioning expires, but he gets to have another round of questioning a little later. He begins with repeating his earlier question, “Can you give us a specific indication, some outcome that will have to be attained, so Americans know when they are going to get their liberties back.”

Dr. Fauci: You are asking for a number. If I have a number, it would have to be my best estimate, and that would be that when the number of infections a day are well below ten thousand a day. At that point, there would be a gradual pulling back of a number of the restrictions you are talking about, particularly when people are vaccinated more and more because a combination of, if you are vaccinated you are protecting yourself for sure, and the more people who get vaccinated in the community, the lower the number of infections will be.

Jordan: Well, give us an idea. I mean, you’ve given us thoughts on all types of subjects, you’ve opined on all kinds of issues. Give us your guess then.

Dr. Fauci: I just did.

Jordan: No, you didn’t. You didn’t give us a time. Are we going to be here two years from now still wearing masks?

Dr. Fauci: You’re ranting again.

Jordan: No, I’m not ranting.

Dr. Fauci: You are.

Dr. Fauci eventually gives his tentative estimate that most restrictions may be lifted early to mid-summer.

Critiquing the Conflict Management Skills of Congressman Jordan and Dr. Fauci

Let’s begin with Congressman Jordan. Most of his questions were relevant and initially he doesn’t sound particularly belligerent. In my opinion, he could have done better throughout by asking his questions in a warm and friendly manner.  When Dr. Fauci made a few comments that Jordan objected to, rather than utilizing the conflict resolution skill of disagreeing without being disagreeable, he instead angrily raises his voice and repeatedly interrupts Dr. Fauci in mid-sentence. What would disagreeing without being disagreeable have looked like in their exchange? I think by empathetically providing statements from time to time that indicated he knows Dr. Fauci has been the bearer of bad news throughout the pandemic and that’s a rough situation to be in, could have helped to traverse some of the roughest terrain of this conflict.

Now, let’s turn to critiquing Dr. Fauci’s handling of the conflict. With the exception of three brief moments, I think he kept his tone of voice in a matter of fact manner that was fitting for this occasion. Where he faltered on this score will be discussed shortly.

Dr. Fauci also answered the questions posed to him in a manner that struck me as fair given the number of factors in steady flux. His biggest mistake, in my opinion, occurred by not taking advantage of making a connection with Jordan on their shared values.

What do I mean by this? Let’s go back to the transcript when after Jordan is expressing his frustration about the loss of liberty that has occurred during the pandemic and his interest in defending the U.S. Constitution, Dr. Fauci replies:

You know, you are indicating liberty and freedom. I look at it as a public health measure that keeps people from dying and going to the hospital.

Although I get the point Dr. Fauci was making here–his job is to provide recommendations to slow the rate of infection and elected officials are in charge of what recommendations are to be mandated–I nevertheless think Dr. Fauci would have done far better to have answered somewhat like the following:

I share with you the love of liberty and freedom, Congressman Jordan, and well recognize the enormous frustrations that have been ongoing during this pandemic. The restrictions about family gatherings have been awfully hard, numerous people who have a business ended up with devastating losses, people have lost their job, and on and on, all of this has been terribly difficult to deal with emotionally as well as financially. And yet, according to the best scientific data we have available, if we did nothing to try to decrease the spread hundreds of thousands of more people would have died, and hospital personnel would have been even more overwhelmed than they had become at the height of the U.S. experience with this pandemic. 

Congressman Jordan, I fully share your love of the Constitution and the desire and obligation to defend it. And in sharing these values, I take note of the context where liberty is explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. In its preamble it states its purpose is, and I quote, “…establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”  

By being embroiled in our current effort to provide for the common defense against our current enemy, the virus, we might find it easy to lose sight of the full context of the Constitution that mentions, justice, tranquility, welfare, and liberty. Therefore, it makes sense to take a step back to recall from our history our fight against our common enemy during World War II.

At that time, we pulled together as one nation, and yes, there were sacrifices that were made to some liberties. There was rationing of many items, men had to leave their jobs to enter into war zones where bullets were flying toward them and bombs going off. Women who wanted to be with their husband and raise their children had to put this aside to go to work in stifling factories. There was some censorship of citizens who sought to provide aid and comfort to the enemy. Meanwhile, the welfare of the soldiers was provided for at the expense of taxpayers, and not all citizens were happy about this. 

Now we are engaged in providing a common defense to battle this pandemic, a battle that has led to the deaths in one year of nearly twice the total number of deaths that occurred during the four years of World War II. Sacrifices are being made. I’m not happy about them, but I was hired by the president to provide my recommendations based on science and a vetting process involving experts at the CDC, to decrease the spread of the virus. Consistent with our Constitution, it is up to our elected officials to decide which recommendations to make mandatory. Citizens have the right to file a suit in court if they believe their rights are being violated.

With regards to the U.S. Constitution’s goal of insuring domestic tranquility, I have observed that a number of our elected officials have been working very much against this principle, and instead are fanning the flames of hatred and division. I ask all of us here today who share the values written in our Constitution to be mindful of the full context of all that is wisely written there.

If Dr. Fauci would have made these types of connections with Jordan’s values, it may very well have taken the wind out of Jordan’s sails, tempering his ire.

Now let’s turn our attention to the three times Dr. Fauci’s matter of fact tone went a bit off the rails. The first of these occasions occurred when Jordan blamed him for a video that was censored. Dr. Fauci objected while having this exchange:

Dr. Fauci: You know, I don’t think anything was censored because they couldn’t disagree with me. I think you are making this a personal thing and it isn’t.

Jordan: It’s not a personal thing.

Dr. Fauci: No, you are. That is exactly what you are doing.

Although I agree with Dr. Fauci’s point that Jordan was coming off as making it personal in words and tone of voice, Fauci’s response, in my opinion as someone trained in conflict resolution, is less than ideal. In conflict resolution we often teach people to make “I” statements rather than insisting on an opinion. Thus, Dr. Fauci might have done better if instead of saying, “No, you are. That is exactly what you are doing,” he said pleasantly, “Well, although you don’t view it as a personal thing, I’m experiencing it as exactly that. To be clear, I did not advocate that the video be censored, and I fully support freedom of speech.”

The second point at which Dr. Fauci went a bit off the rails was during this exchange:

Jordan, interrupting, says: And I’m asking the question, What measures have to be attained before Americans get their first amendment liberties back? 

Dr. Fauci, now sounding clearly annoyed: I just told you that!

Jordan: You haven’t given anything specific. You said we hope, tell me something specific.

I get why Dr. Fauci was exasperated at this point. He believed he had provided the best answer available, but I do think Jordan was in his rights to ask for a more specific guess. Dr. Fauci eventually did provide more specifics that came when Jordan made this request.

Shortly after this exchange, the third time Dr. Fauci went off the rails, in my opinion, occurred when he accused Jordan of ranting. After Jordan denied this, Dr. Fauci insisted that he is ranting. This moved the conversation to a long, irrelevant period during which Jordan’s anger apparently had greatly increased, and he went into a long paragraph defending himself, saying he’s an elected official, Dr. Fauci is not, Dr. Fauci’s salary is very high, and on and on.

Dr. Fauci’s frustration with Jordan’s interruptions and his angry tone of voice is understandable. And though ranting may have been an accurate description, most people would view Dr. Fauci’s comment as an insult. Insulting someone in the middle of a conflict just leads to more trouble than it is worth. I think Dr. Fauci would have been better off just saying something like, “Congressman Jordan, I am having a hard time dealing with your tone and frequent interruptions. I understand you have strong feelings about this, as I certainly do. Maybe we need a break so I can deal with how I’m feeling.”

Well, those are a few thoughts that came to mind while observing this congressional exchange. I’d love to get other views.

Wishing for all of you to stay safe,
Jeff

———————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

conflict resolutionconflict resolution skillsCongressman JordanDr. FauciU.S. House Coronavirus Hearing