My op-ed today in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette asks that Summer Lee talk with the people she disagrees with. That is how democracy is supposed to work.

The Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle, the weekly newspaper that, as its masthead proclaims, “connect[s] Jewish Pittsburgh,” says that my representative in Congress, Summer Lee, refuses to speak to it. I believe that this is so because on those occasions when I have complained to Lee’s staff about this refusal, no one has denied it. Nor has anyone explained it.

The most recent instance of Lee’s silence occurred when Lee joined eight fellow Democratic House members in voting “no” on a July 18 Republican-sponsored resolution reaffirming support for the state of Israel. In reporting on Lee’s vote, the Chronicle noted tersely, “Lee did not respond to a request from the Chronicle for comment.”

An offensive refusal

Lee’s refusal to engage is both offensive and bewildering. It is not that I am offended as a Jew — I left Judaism years ago — and I do not consider Lee’s actions to be in any way anti-Semitic.

Nor am I offended by her vote on the resolution. The resolution stated: “The State of Israel is not a racist or apartheid state, Congress rejects all forms of anti-Semitism and xenophobia, and the United states will always be a staunch partner and supporter of Israel.” It passed 412 to 9 with one “present” vote.

The resolution was introduced to embarrass Democrats after Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington called Israel a “racist state.” Jayapal later apologized for the comment.

Technically speaking, Israel is not an apartheid state. Nor is it racist in any formal sense. But it is also true that Palestinians in the West Bank are treated unfairly, as certain segments of Israeli society seek annexation to thwart a two-state solution, and that Arab citizens of Israel are not always accorded the same rights and respect as are Jewish Israelis.

The “no” votes were clearly meant to protest these conditions as well as to protest the unquestioning American support that Israel enjoys. While I would not have voted “no,” I can understand, and sympathize with, those who did.

What is offensive about Lee’s refusal to talk to the Chronicle is simply that she represents thousands of Jewish constituents — and non-Jews — who choose to follow national events and issues through coverage in the Chronicle. By what right does a democratically elected public official reject this choice by thousands of her constituents and refuse to engage with their chosen media?

As our representative, Lee owes us an explanation of her actions. And if we choose to read those explanations in the Chronicle, then that is where she needs to make them.

But Lee’s refusal to speak to the Chronicle is not just offensive; it is also bewildering. After all, part of the reason that the dissenters voted “no” on the resolution was to expose the political taboo in America on any serious criticism of Israel. There is plenty of racism in Israel, just as there is in the United States. American politicians are permitted to address racism here, but not there.

Ironically, the Chronicle was giving Lee the very opportunity to address these issues that the nine objecting representatives were presumably seeking.

Lee cannot credibly claim, as justification for her silence, that as a critic of Israel she would not receive a fair hearing in the Chronicle. Over the years, the Chronicle has achieved an excellent reputation for its professional journalistic standards where criticism of Israel is concerned. Many other critics have written, and been quoted, in its pages.

Of course there would have been criticism of Lee’s position by readers and perhaps by the editors if she had granted an interview to the Chronicle. But those criticisms appeared anyway. What was missing was her side of the story, which many people including myself, would like to see.

What seems to me to motivate Lee’s conduct is a style of politics that is very common now among both Democrats and Republicans. The old idea of politics was that one attempted to convince the public that one side’s policies and principles were superior to those of the other side.

Practicing democracy

The increasingly dominant idea of politics today has nothing to do with persuading anyone of anything. The fundamental idea is to gain power by turning out larger numbers of one base versus the numbers turned out by the other side.

Lee’s refusal to engage the Chronicle is similar to the refusal of many Democrats to appear on Fox News and the refusal by some Republican politicians to give interviews to the mainstream media.

Many people say that democracy in America is threatened. They usually mean threatened by their political opponents. But in the saga of the silence of Summer Lee we see that we ourselves are the threat to democracy and that the best way to defend democracy is simply to practice it.

I hope my representative will soon do exactly that.

Bruce Ledewitz, a professor of law at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University, is author of the upcoming book, “The Universe Is on Our Side: Restoring Faith in American Public Life.”

First Published August 22, 2023, 5:30am