THE once chart-topping boyband is said to have cut all final ties following a long-running secret divide, years of silence and bitter behind-the-scenes fallouts.
The Wanted shocked fans after they split in January 2014 to ‘pursue personal endeavours’Credit: GettyThey briefly reunited in 2021 for a charity concert in Tom’s honour, but old wounds have reopenedCredit: GettyNow, only some of them are on speaking terms, and one band member reveals why they will never sing together againCredit: Getty Images – Getty
The platinum-selling group were behind hit songs such as “Glad You Came”, “All Time Low” and “Chasing the Sun” before they disbanded.
They briefly reunited in 2021 for a charity concert in Tom’s honour, but old wounds have reopened – and some members are said to no longer be on speaking terms.
Insiders claimed friendships “never fully healed” after the band’s initial breakup, with egos, solo projects and clashing personalities driving a deeper wedge between the lads.
The break up
The Wanted announced they were to split in January 2014 to “pursue personal endeavours” after completing their upcoming ‘Word of Mouth Tour’.
In a statement posted on their website, the band said: “The Wanted are pleased to announce the release of their new video and single ‘Glow In The Dark’ taken from their November release ‘Word of Mouth’.
“They are very excited to perform ‘Glow In The Dark’ along with their smash singles ‘I Found You’, ‘Chasing The Sun’, and ‘Glad You Came’, amongst others for their fans on their upcoming ‘Word of Mouth Tour’.
“This tour will be their last for a while as Tom, Max, Jay, Siva and Nathan have collectively decided to take time to pursue personal endeavours following the tour’s conclusion.
“The band wants to stress to their fans that they will continue on as The Wanted and look forward to many successful projects together in the future.
“They thank their fans for their continued love and support and look forward to seeing them on tour.”
‘Very difficult conversations’
Although their official statement claimed they’d “continue on as The Wanted,” Max later revealed that simmering tensions and clashing ambitions had secretly driven the group apart.
Max admitted: “Over the past year, there has been a lot of tension. Our personal lives drove us apart – things started to happen and we were drifting. We used to be such a brotherly pact, but it started to feel like it wasn’t The Wanted anymore.”
He went on to confess that he and bandmate Nathan were the ones who pushed for the split – despite protests from the others.
“We had a very difficult conversation,” Max said. “Our manager Scooter Braun asked us who would want to take a step out after and try to do their own thing. Me and Nathan both said we have other ambitions.”
Both singers went on to be represented by Braun – with Nathan briefly finding solo success (and headlines) thanks to a short-lived PR romance with Ariana Grande, while Max landed a role on Glee.
But behind the scenes, the duo’s diverging paths reportedly caused even more tension within the group.
Siva hits out at Max
Siva hit back at bandmate Max after The Wanted split, slamming his comments about “personal relationships causing issues” as “untrue and very unfair.”
Speaking out in an interview, Siva instead blamed their E! reality show The Wanted Life for sparking tension within the group.
He said: “I think from doing the TV show we all kind of knew where we stood and from that I felt like there was some sense of… I felt like it was every man for himself looking back on when the show aired.
“I’ve never been that way and I’d never actually seen it before until I looked back at the show. I think that is where we lost the team element and from there it kind of just went.”
The boys gave fans an insight into their golden years in the E! reality show The Wanted LifeCredit: YouTubeThe Wanted Life saw the boyband living it up on tourCredit: YouTubeNathan has openly talked about falling out with co-stars Siva and Max in the pastCredit: YouTube
Despite the rift, Siva said he wanted to find common ground with Max, adding: “Aside from the drama with Max, I’m going to talk to him to find a way forward and be adults about it.
“All of us boys are like brothers, it’s all I’ve ever known and we’re going on tour together.
“I think we’re just going to be professional with each other and give the fans a good show – because it’s all about the fans at the end of the day.”
Nathan cutting ties
In 2016, Nathan admitted he wasn’t talking to Siva or Max anymore.
Nathan told Yahoo: “I still class Jay [McGuiness] as a really good friend. He’s a really nice person. And Tom [Parker], I’m not so sure about where the others are at but I’m sure they are very busy and very happy.”
However, Nathan admitted that if everyone was on board with a reunion, he would be happy to have a “conversation” about it.
He said: “Obviously, I am very focused on my solo career at the moment, so I haven’t thought about the band ever getting back together, but you never know what is going to happen in the future.
“If there was an opportunity and everyone wanted to, it’s a conversation, but if everyone is still happy doing their own thing, then I think everyone will just be happy to continue as they are.”
Meanwhile, Siva was living in Los Angeles, attempting to crack Hollywood.
His illness brought the group back together, reuniting them publicly in October that year.
Reflecting on the reunion, Max said: “I think I speak on behalf of everyone, in the time away from it, it gave me time to reflect and appreciate what we’d achieved and how good our music actually was.
“Because at the time we were doing it, it was so packed in that we didn’t get to really appreciate how much we enjoyed each other’s company or how good our music was because… like, every day, it was all a bit mad.”
Jay added: “Even when we were under so much pressure and we’d be squabbling and whatever was going on, we always had fun, we were always very down to earth. But really,” he continued on a more serious note, “time helps a lot. And all of our perspective has changed.
“We are grateful, we’re the boy band that walk into the room and are, like, ‘I’m just happy to be here.’ Back in the day, Max has said this a few times, we wanted a number-one after number-one because we’d had that, and we felt terrible when we didn’t get that. And when five young men have that sort of ambition, it can get really tense.”
Jay said he believes the group reunion proved they could finally let bygones be bygones and simply enjoy being together again.
“There was a moment where I thought I was going to break down and have a meltdown,” Tom admitted.
“But the boys just comforted me… It was just an emotional night all around, even for the whole day and stuff. And just walking into the venue – we had never played the Royal Albert Hall before, when we played all around the world.”
He added: “There’s just something beautifully special about it.”
The Wanted’s greatest hits include ‘Chasing the Sun’ and ‘Walks Like Rihanna’Credit: Alamy
Max and Siva tour
The Wanted fans were left baffled in May 2024 after Max announced he was heading on tour with just one of his bandmates.
The Strictly Come Dancing star revealed he would be touring alongside Siva – but without Jay or Nathan.
Before the tour, Max told fans: “Myself and Siva can’t wait for this! Our first time in India… dream come true!”
Fans were quick to question the absence of Jay and Nathan – sparking fears the original line-up had officially fallen apart.
It later emerged that Jay would be performing in 2:22 A Ghost Story in Dublin, while Nathan is thought to be focusing on new music.
The shows marked the first time members of the group have performed since the tragic death of bandmate Tom.
The divide
The band have openly admitted there was a clear divide during their heyday – with Max and Tom on one side, and the others forming their own group.
Max and Siva even confessed they never imagined they’d end up touring as a duo when The Wanted went on hiatus in 2014, admitting they “weren’t the closest” and barely spent time together off stage.
Max said: “I’m not going to lie, if you’d said to us 10 years ago that it’d be me and Siva doing this together we’d be like no, never.
Siva agreed: “Max was with Tom, I was with Nathan and Jay.”
Max continued: “Apart from working, we didn’t spend any time together, so I feel like I’ve got to know Siva more in the last year than in the whole 10 before it.
Reflecting on Jay and Nathan’s decision not to rejoin the group, Max added: “We had lots of conversations with the other boys and each other.
“The other boys are so happy doing what they’re doing and they’re really focused on their lives and their careers.
Siva added: “We missed being in the band… we really wanted to get back on stage.”
Future reunion?
Earlier this year, Nathan told The Sun they would never get back together – as the band “will only ever be a five-piece.”
Nathan, Tom, Max, Siva and Jay reunited for a greatest hits album and one-off show in 2021, which was followed by a tour in early 2022, ending just two weeks before Tom’s passing.
Speaking about the emotional concerts, Nathan said: “Obviously, you’d give anything for it not to have happened.
“But, equally, I’m so grateful that we were able to have that time, given that it did happen.
“It was just such a special time and the reception that he got every night, he really felt it. And it meant so much to him that he could do that.
“He was desperate to do that tour. There were tough moments, but we were having some of our fondest memories with Tom over that time.
While Max and Siva toured as The Wanted 2.0 – a four-piece reunion with Nathan and Jay seems out of the question.
Nathan said: “I’m really happy for them. They get a lot of enjoyment in performing the music and they see it as a tribute to Tom.
“Whereas Jay and I’s approach to it is that there’s a lot of emotion attached to that still. And I think we would find that really difficult.
“It’s just two different approaches and neither one is wrong. I think it’s really difficult imagining The Wanted as a four-piece because The Wanted has been and will only ever be a five-piece.
“It’s difficult imagining not performing with Tom.”
The Wanted’s Nathan Sykes wed Charlotte Burke this month – but Max and Siva weren’t present at the celebrationCredit: Instagram
Nathan’s wedding
Nathantied the knot with his girlfriend of six yearsCharlotte Burke in October 2025.
Nathan opted for an intimate celebration, inviting just 61 of their closest friends and family, among them was his bandmate Jay.
But Max and Siva were noticeably absent from Nathan’s wedding.
Speaking toOK!Nathan said: “We haven’t touched base recently, so I’m not sure they would have known the wedding date.
“With them being out in America at the time, we’ve not had the chance to [catch up], but I’m sure we will soon.”
He added: “We had a room full of people we’re comfortable with, so it was a really safe space and allowed us to relax.”
However, it now seems that Max and Nathan might not be talking at all.
Unfollow
Fans on Reddit noticed that the pair unfollowed each other on Instagram, cutting off social media communication.
One said: “Couldn’t help but notice Max and Nathan unfollowed each other? I wonder if there’s any beef between them lol.”
Another added: “I’ve always suspected Max and Nathan had a falling out before they broke up the first time.”
A third penned: “It’s a real shame because teenage me loved Nathan and Max’s interactions.
“I remember when Nathan used to comment on Max’s ig posts around 2 years ago.
“They haven’t followed each other in a very long time.”
Max and Nathan went head-to-head as they were both managed by Scooter BraunCredit: AlamyThe bandmates reunited for a greatest hits album and one-off show in 2021, which was followed by a tour in early 2022, ending just two weeks before Tom’s passingCredit: GettyIn 2024, Max and Siva went on tour without their bandmatesCredit: Getty – Contributor
FREDERICKSBURG, Va. — If there’s agreement on anything in the two states with governor’s races this year, it’s that utility bills are a growing concern among voters.
One Virginia voter, Kim Wilson, lamented at a town hall recently that her electricity bill seems to go up every month, no matter how much she tries to mitigate the costs. She was drawn to the event in part by its title: “The energy bills are too damn high.”
“It’s way too high,” Wilson readily agreed.
In New Jersey, Herb Michitsch of Kenilworth said his electric bill has climbed to nearly $400 a month, or more than four times what it was when he and his wife moved into their home half a century ago.
“Something really has to be done,” Michitsch said.
That something must be done is pretty much where the agreement ends. It’s what must be done that splits politicians back into rival camps.
Democratic candidates in the two states are far more likely to embrace clean energy options like wind and solar than their Republican opponents. The two states’ Republican nominees are more closely aligned with the policies of President Trump, who has called climate change a “con job” and promotes more traditional energy sources like gas and coal. New Jersey Republican nominee Jack Ciattarelli has acknowledged that human-caused climate change is occurring, but he says Democrats have driven up costs with their clean energy push.
Which side voters land on in the off-year elections will give both parties plenty to consider in what feels destined to be an emerging economic issue heading into next year’s midterm elections.
At a recent rally in New Jersey, Democratic state Sen. Vin Gopal made clear that he stood with Democratic nominee Mikie Sherrill in support of her plans to lower costs. But Gopal acknowledged that the outcome could signal whether voters are ready to embrace the president’s approach or have simply grown weary of national politics.
“The whole country is watching what happens,” he said.
Technology drives up costs
The debate comes as people in the two states grapple with double-digit percentage increases in monthly electricity bills. The exploding costs are driven by soaring demand, particularly from data centers, and by the rapid onset of energy-intensive artificial intelligence technology. Virginia’s largest energy utility also has linked potential future rate increases to inflation and other costs.
In Virginia’s open race to succeed a term-limited GOP incumbent, Democrat Abigail Spanberger and Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears are at odds over the development of renewable energy sources.
Spanberger has laid out a plan to expand solar and wind production in underused locations, praising a wind project off the coast of Virginia Beach. In a debate against her opponent, she also said she would “ensure that data centers pay their fair share” as costs rise. The state is home to the world’s largest data center market,
Republican Winsome Earle-Sears wasn’t having it.
“That’s all she wants, is solar and wind,” Earle-Sears said of Spanberger at the debate. “Well, if you look outside, the sun isn’t shining and the breeze isn’t blowing, and then what, Abigail, what will you do?”
In New Jersey, where Ciattarelli’s endorsement by Trump included recent social media posts praising his energy affordability plans, the GOP nominee blames rising costs on eight years of Democratic control of state government.
Ciattarelli says he would pull New Jersey out of a regional greenhouse gas trading bloc, which Democratic incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy reentered when he first took office in 2018.
“It’s been a failure,” Ciattarelli said at the final debate of the campaign. “Electricity is at an all-time high.”
He’s also come out as a strident opponent of wind energy off the state’s coast, an effort Democrats spearheaded under Murphy. A major offshore wind project ground to a halt when the Danish company overseeing it scrapped projects, citing supply chain problems and high interest rates.
At the center of Sherrill’s campaign promise on the issue is an executive order to freeze rates and build cheaper and cleaner power generation.
“I know my opponent laughs at it,” Sherrill said recently.
A growing concern among voters
The candidates’ focus on affordability and utility rates reflects an unease among voters. A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found electricity bills are a “major” source of stress for 36% of U.S. adults, at a time when data center development for AI could further strain the power grid.
Perhaps that’s why the statewide races have become something of an energy proxy battle in Virginia. Clean Virginia, a clean energy advocacy group that targets utility corruption, has backed all three Democratic candidates for statewide office in Virginia — a first for the organization. GOP statewide candidates, meanwhile, have accepted money from Dominion Energy, the largest electric utility in Virginia.
To further complicate an already complex issue: Virginia has passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which calls for utilities to sunset carbon energy production methods by 2045.
Republican House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, who represents the southwest edge of Virginia, had failed to alter part of the state’s Clean Economy Act earlier this year. Kilgore, whose top donor is Dominion Energy, said in February: “If their bills go any higher, there are folks in my region that are not able to pay them now, they’re definitely not going to be able to pay them in the future.”
Evan Vaughn, executive director of MAREC Action, a group of Mid-Atlantic renewable energy developers, said candidates from both parties are in a tough spot because bringing down prices quickly will be difficult given broader market dynamics.
“Voters should look to which candidate they think can do the best to stabilize prices by bringing more generation online,” he said. “That’s really going to be the key to affordability.”
Michitsch, who’s backing Sherrill in the governor’s race and said he would campaign for her, said her proposal shows she’s willing to do something to address spiraling costs.
“We need to change,” he said. “And I think she is here to change things.”
Shakira Khan opened up about her experience on Love Island during a chat on Paul C. Brunson’s We Need To Talk podcast. She spoke about feeling like an outcast and the divide in the villa.
The divide has had the world speaking – but where did it stem from?(Image: ITV/Shutterstock)
Love Island star, Shakira Khan, 22 has opened up about what life inside the Love Island villa was really like, claiming the show’s “outcasts” all had one thing in common.
Shakira took to Paul C. Brunson’s We Need To Talk podcast to delve into how she and other women of colour were pushed to the margins in the villa saying a troubling “outcast” pattern quickly emerged.
She revealed that she, along with fellow Islanders Toni Laites and Yasmine Pettet called themselves “the outcasts” after feeling pushed out by the main group but soon noticed it wasn’t just them.
“People couldn’t sit there and say there was no divide, there was a divide and that’s okay,” she explained. “As much as people want to sh*t on that, that was my lived experience and my friends will say the same.”
“Me, Toni and Yas call ourselves the outcasts but you could collectively add Billykiss to that, Malisha, Andrada, Emma and there’s a pattern here which I don’t think anyone wants to talk about,” she said. “Women of colour.”
It was clear during the season there was a divide in the show, many viewers took to social media to share their opinions and what side of the fence they were sitting on. Shakira said viewers weren’t wrong to sense a divide on the show, but insisted it ran far deeper than what made it to air.
The divide started on one of the very first days, when Shakira found herself single in the villa, therefore putting her at risk of being sent home. After she pulled islanders for chat’s with each conversation being reciprocated which led to girls began to talk and the quickly there was a shift – the divide began.
According to Shakira, anyone seen as a “threat” to the main group was quickly isolated. “We banded together, the outcasts,” she said.
She drew a direct link between her villa experience and wider society, saying it reminded her of segregation growing up. “It boils down to childhood, people were banned from the community, even in my hometown,” she said.
“We talk about the segregation of white communities, Asian communities people find community in their own and people they have shared experiences with.”
Shakira revealed that these moments in the villa soon had an impact on her. “If you get told 100 times a day ‘you’re wrong, you’re irrelevant’, that’s what you start to internalise. You believe that’s the opinion on the outside because you’ve got nothing else to go off,” she said.
For more stories like this subscribe to our weekly newsletter, The Weekly Gulp, for a curated roundup of trending stories, poignant interviews, and viral lifestyle picks from The Mirror’s Audience U35 team delivered straight to your inbox.
Who is Shakira Khan?
Shakira Khan, 23, from Burnley is an former contestant from season 12 of Love Island She was one of the main villa girls, starting from day one. Throughout the season, we watched Shakira face many challenges from a chaotic love triangle to villa rivalries, however she made it all the way to the Love Island final despite feeling her being mixed heritage, Pakistan and White may hinder her experience.
“I went to a predominantly white high school, I was not the beauty standard, so I was thinking, ‘What have I signed up for?’ she told I-D Magazine. “Everyone’s gonna love the blonde hair, blue-eyed girls, we see year in year out on Love Island. I thought, based on initial attraction, it wasn’t going to go well for me, but I was pleasantly surprised.”
Where can I listen to the We Need To Talk with Paul C. Brunson podcast?
No, Shakira did not win Love Island 2025, however she came second place with her partner Harry Cooksley. Toni Laites and Cash Mercer won the show and the £50K prize.
Are Shakira Khan and Harry Cooksley still together?
Yes the pair are still dating and going strong since the Villa, Shakira explained on the podcast he treats her well. “He’s witty, he’s charming, he’s intelligent – all those things that I said I look for in a partner.”
“We’re dating each other, can’t put a label on it.” she said, “I’m not dating anyone else, he’s not dating anyone else so you can say we’re exclusively dating each other.” she added
Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We’d love to hear from you!
INCLINE VILLAGE, Nev. — Jim Ross has had a long and fruitful career as a Democratic campaign strategist. Among his victories was electing Gavin Newsom as San Francisco mayor.
Tom Ross has enjoyed similar success on the Republican side. He counts Kevin McCarthy’s election to the Legislature and, later, Congress, among his wins.
The two are brothers who, despite their differences, harbor an abiding love and respect for one another, along with an ironclad resolve that nothing — no campaign, no candidate, no political issue — can or ever will be allowed to drive a wedge between them.
“Tom’s the best person I know. The best person I know,” Jim, 57, said as his brother, 55, sat across from him at a local burrito joint, tearing up. “There’s issues we could go round and round on, which we’re not going to do.”
“Especially,” said Tom, “with someone you care about and love.”
That sort of fraternal bond, transcending partisanship and one of the most heated political fights of this charged moment, shouldn’t be unusual or particularly noteworthy — even for a pair who make their living working for parties locked in furious combat. But in these vexing and highly contentious times it surely is.
Maybe there’s something others can take away.
::
The Ross brothers grew up in Incline Village, not far from where Nevada meets California. That was decades ago, before the forested hamlet on Tahoe’s east shore became a playground for the rich and ultra-rich.
The family — Mom, Dad, four boys and a girl — settled there after John Ross retired from a career in the Air Force, which included three combat tours in Vietnam.
John and his wife, Joan, weren’t especially political, though they were active and civic-minded. Joan was involved in the Catholic church. John, who took up a career in real estate, worked on ways to improve the community.
The lessons they taught their children were grounded in duty, discipline and detail. Early on, the kids learned there’s no such thing as a free ride. Jim got his first job at the 76 station, before he could drive. Tom mowed lawns, washed cars and ran a lemonade stand. The least fortunate among the siblings wore a bear suit and waved a sign, trying to shag customers for their dad’s real estate business.
To this day, the brothers disdain anything that smacks of entitlement. “That’s our family,” Jim said. “We’re all workers.”
Like their parents, the two weren’t politically active growing up. They ended up majoring in government and political science — Jim at Saint Mary’s College in the Bay Area, Tom at Gonzaga University in Washington state — as a kind of default. Both had instructors who brought the subject to life.
Jim’s start in the profession came in his junior year when Clint Reilly, then one of California premier campaign strategists, came to speak to his college class. It was the first time Jim realized it was possible to make a living in politics — and Reilly’s snazzy suit suggested it could be a lucrative one.
Jim interned for Reilly and after graduating and knocking about for a time — teaching skiing in Tahoe, working as a sales rep for Banana Boat sunscreen — he tapped an acquaintance from Reilly’s firm to land a job with Frank Jordan’s 1991 campaign for San Francisco mayor.
From there, Jim moved on to a state Assembly race in Wine Country, just as Tom was graduating and looking for work. Using his connections, Jim helped Tom find a job as the driver for a congressional candidate in the area.
At the time, both were Republicans, like their father. Their non-ideological approach to politics also reflected the thinking of Col. Ross. Public service wasn’t about party pieties, Jim said, but rather “finding a solution to a problem.”
Jim, left, and Tom Ross have only directly competed in a campaign once, on a statewide rent control measure. They talk shop but avoid discussing politics.
(William Hale Irwin / For The Times)
Jim’s drift away from the GOP began when he worked for another Republican Assembly candidate whom he remembers, distastefully, as reflexively partisan, homophobic and anti-worker. His changed outlook solidified after several months working on a 1992 Louisiana congressional race. The grinding poverty he saw in the South was shocking, Jim said, and its remedy seemed well beyond the up-by-your-bootstraps nostrums he’d absorbed.
Jim came to see government as a necessary agent for change and improvement, and that made the Democratic Party a more natural home. “There’s not one thing that has bettered human existence that hasn’t had, at its core, our ability to work collectively,” Jim said. “And our ability to work collectively comes down to government.”
Tom looked on placidly, a Latin rhythm capering overhead.
He believes that success, and personal fulfillment, lies in individual achievement. The Republicans he admires include Jack Kemp, the rare member of his party who focused on urban poverty, and the George W. Bush of 2000, who ran for president as a “compassionate conservative” with a strong record of bipartisan accomplishment as Texas governor.
(Tom is no fan of Donald Trump, finding the president’s casual cruelty toward people particularly off-putting.)
He distinctly remembers the moment, at age 22, when he realized he was standing on his own two feet, financially supporting himself and making his way in the world through the power of his own perseverance.
“For me, that’s what Republicans should be,” Tom said. “How do you give people that experience in life? That’s what we should be trying to do.”
It took a physical toll on Jim Ross, Newsom’s campaign manager, who suffered chest pains and, at one point, wound up in the hospital. Was the strain worth it, he wondered. Should he quit?
“The only person I could really call and talk to was Tom,” Jim said. “He understands what it is to work that hard on a campaign. And he wasn’t going to go and leak it to the press, or tell someone who would use it in some way to hurt me.”
That kind of empathy and implicit trust, which runs both ways, far outweighs any political considerations, the two said. Why would they surrender such a deep and meaningful relationship for some short-term tactical gain, or allow a disagreement over personalities or policy to set things asunder?
Jim lives and works out of the East Bay. Tom runs his business from Sacramento. The two faced each other on the campaign battlefield just once, squaring off over a 2018 ballot measure that sought to expand rent control in California. The initiative was rejected.
Though they’ve staked opposing positions on Newsom’s redistricting measure, Proposition 50, Jim has no formal role in the Democratic campaign. Tom is working to defeat it.
The brief airing of their differences was unusual, coming solely at the behest of your friendly columnist. As a rule, the brothers talk business but avoid politics; there’s hardly a need — they already know where each other is coming from. After all, they shared a bedroom growing up.
Jim had a story to tell.
Last spring, as their mother lay dying, the two left the hospital in Reno to shower and get a bit of rest at their father’s place in Incline Village. The phone rang. It was the overnight nurse, calling to let them know their mom had passed away.
“Tom takes the call,” Jim said. “The first thing he says to the nurse is, ‘Are you OK? Is it hard for you to deal with this?’ And that’s how Tom is. Major thing, but he thinks about the other person first.”
He laughed, a loud gale. “I’m not that way.”
Tom had a story to tell.
In 2017, he bought a mountain bike, to celebrate the end of his treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. He’d been worn out by six months of chemotherapy and wasn’t anywhere near full strength. Still, he was determined to tackle one of Tahoe’s most scenic rides, which involves a lung-searing, roughly five-mile climb.
Tom walked partway, then got back on his bike and powered uphill through the last 500 or so yards.
Waiting for him up top was Jim, seated alongside two strangers. “That’s my brother,” he proudly pointed out. “He beat cancer.”
Tom’s eyes welled. His chin quavered and his voice cracked. He paused to collect himself.
“Do I want to sacrifice that relationship for some stupid tweet, or some in-the-moment anger?” he asked. “That connection with someone, you want to cut it over that? That’s just stupid. That’s just silly.”
Reporting from Washington — For those outside Washington, government institutions seem equally dysfunctional. Inside the Beltway, however, the Senate occupies a somewhat special place.
The upper chamber is often revered – especially by its own members — as a more thoughtful, deliberate and collaborative body, where respect for minority viewpoints is baked into cherished rules and precedents.
But one by one, those long-standing traditions that have served as a check against extreme legislation or appointments are being tossed aside amid growing partisanship and a closely divided government.
Rather than nudging senators to compromise, the rules are now a being used in a procedural arms race that threatens to erode the very culture and practice that made the Senate different than the majority-rules House.
“This is the latest manifestation of a changing and declining Senate,” said Thomas Mann, a congressional scholar at the Brookings Institution and the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies.
“The polarization between the parties and the intensity of sentiment outside the Senate has already led to changes in norms and practices,” he said. “Our system is not well structured to operate in a period of intense polarization.”
The latest example came Wednesday when GOP lawmakers took the extraordinary step of changing committee rules to advance two of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees without any Democrats in attendance.
Democrats, revealing their own willingness to defy Senate niceties, had boycotted the votes on Steven Mnuchin as Treasury secretary and Rep. Tom Price as head of Health and Human Services as they sought more answers on the nominees’ records.
Now Trump would like to see other Senate rules scrapped to the ensure approval of his Supreme Court nominee, Neil M. Gorsuch, whom Democrats had vowed to block even before his name was revealed.
Democrats are still stinging over Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s refusal for most of last year to grant a vote for President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, to fill the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
Supreme Court nominations have rarely been subjected to filibusters, but Democrats are talking about taking such a move against Gorsuch. In response, Republicans are considering changing Senate rules so only 51 votes are needed to end the delaying tactic, rather than the current 60. The move is seen as so severe it’s been dubbed the “nuclear option.”
“I would say, ‘If you can, Mitch, go nuclear,’ because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was caught up in the web,” Trump said Wednesday.
Democrats opened the door themselves in 2013 when they used the nuclear option to push through several of Obama’s judicial and executive nominations, which Republicans had been filibustering.
The final frontier in this procedural war could be ending the use of filibusters on ordinary legislation. That would means that bills — which typically require 60 votes to advance in the Senate — could be moved with a 51-vote simple majority. With Republicans currently holding 52 seats, it would relegate Democrats to bystanders in the Senate.
“What is the Senate if that’s gone?” asked one Senate aide. “It’s just the House.”
The Senate has long been a frustrating place. Its slow pace and cumbersome rules are nothing like the more rambunctious House, where the majority can quickly pass a legislative agenda.
But the founders designed the bicameral system with that unique difference — one chamber to swiftly answer the will of the people, the other for a more measured second look before sending bills on to the White House.
Only in the 20th century did senators create an option for ending a filibuster as a way to cut off prolonged debate.
It all sounds pretty archaic to an increasingly frustrated public that is reeling in an intensely partisan environment.
Trump’s election has only accelerated the pressure to end the civilities of the past. On the Republican side, tea party activists pressured Republicans to jam Obama’s agenda, even if that meant shutting down the government.
Now Democratic voters are marching in the streets to stop Trump, pressuring their party leaders to confront just as aggressively what many fear is a dangerous agenda.
“What we’re seeing now is that the base is more motivated than any of us have ever seen,” said Mark Stanley, spokesman for Demand Progress, a 2-million-member progressive group whose activists will be calling and emailing Democratic senators to oppose Gorsuch. It recently turned out 3,000 people at a Democratic senator’s town hall meeting in Rhode Island to protest his vote for Trump’s CIA director nominee.
“Especially in these unprecedented times we’re in, Democrats have to stick by their principles and do what their constituents are really asking for,” Stanley said.
Though both parties have contributed to the gridlock in the Senate, it was McConnell’s willingness to utilize the filibuster as an ordinary weapon in the Obama era — rather than the occasional cudgel — that is largely seen as having fueled today’s standoff.
McConnell has made it clear that Trump’s Supreme Court nominee will be confirmed even if Democrats mount a filibuster — all but declaring he will use the nuclear option to do so.
Such a move would probably poison legislative operations in the Senate for the foreseeable future.
The prospect has so alarmed some Democrats that they may be willing to hold their nose and vote for Gorsuch to preserve the filibuster. Others are not so sure.
Sen. Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, acknowledges that when he arrived in the Senate in 2013, he, too, was so quickly frustrated by the obstruction that he was willing to consider rules changes.
But the former governor vividly remembers a private meeting of the Democratic caucus when one of the older senators advised the newer arrivals about the importance of the Senate as the cooling body and urged them to think about the long-term ramifications of their actions.
“One of the things that surprise me about this place is that people do things and they expect it’s not going to have results four or five years from now,” King said. “I’ve come to realize the 60-vote majority requires some kind of bipartisan support which ultimately makes legislation better.”
