Students and guest speakers discussed the real-life influences on the popular Netflix series "House of Cards" within congressional politics Tuesday night.
Hosted by the Alexander Hamilton Society, the event featured clips of the show along with a moderated debate to discuss its reflection of Congress today. Speakers included David Schanzer, associate professor of the practice at the Sanford School of Public Policy, and Mackenzie Eaglen, former principal defense advisor to Senator Susan Collins.
Schanzer opened his discussion with an analysis of the character Frank Underwood, the majority whip of the show's fictional United States House of Representatives, and said that there were positive and negative aspects to his behavior that can be seen in Congress today, citing Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi as examples.
"There are two different faces of Underwood—he's corrupt and conniving, yet charming. The bottom line is that we need need a Frank Underwood in Washington," he said.
Eaglen echoed the sentiment.
"I long for the days of ["House of Cards" protagonist] Frank Underwoods in Congress—the Lyndon B. Johnsons and the Clintons," Eaglen said.
Schanzer elaborated on the theme of corruption seen in the series and noted that corruption in Congress is not as blatant as shown on TV, yet still exists in the form of the campaign finance system.
"There’s so much legalized corruption built into our system that Frank Underwood wouldn’t have to do what he does," Schanzer said. "We don’t need the type of quid pro quo corruption seen in House of Cards because it's all around us."
Schanzer and Eaglen both agreed, however, that corruption in Congress took place with an end goal in mind.
"Members [of Congress] usually believe that they are acting in the best interest of everyone," Schanzer said. "They don't use corruption simply to use corruption. Nothing’s really that black and white."
Eaglen spoke of the subtle role of corruption within military spending bills. According to her, these bills have become a slush fund for several unforeseen costs of the military—including ebola military efforts and arming rebels in Syria—that are not specified in any documents. They continue to be in effect because many areas of government benefit from them.
"The White House and Pentagon need the military spending bills for different reasons, so they stay, despite the hand of corruption," she said.
Both speakers also discussed the reality of alcohol as a factor in political interactions, as featured on "House of Cards". One of the scenes shown was a clip of Underwood negotiating with Terry Womack, the majority leader of the House of Representatives, in an informal setting with alcohol. Eaglen noted the importance of alcohol in this scene and in Congress at large, saying that it's often used as a tool in negotiations.
"The booze factor is huge in Washington," she said. "It greases the wheels. Whenever members need to become friends with someone to gain favors, they become drinking buddies."
Both speakers talked about their experiences within Congress and how they reflected many other aspects of "House of Cards". Schanzer, who was a former Capitol Hill staff member, spoke of a welfare reform proposal whose contents were leaked to the public, causing protests within the community. Despite these obstacles, he said things have calmed down.
"Nowadays, there's a lot less drama in the job description," he said.
Junior Emma Campbell-Mohn, president of AHM, said that the event was a success.
"[This event] was started because we wanted to start a dialogue on the actions and lifestyle of Congress," she said. "Tying it into 'House of Cards' is a great way to show students that it is absolutely relevant, even if it's a bit dramatized."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.