Every year, hundreds of members of Congress send emails to their constituents about something many Americans may not realize they are responsible for: nominating students to the United States service academies. These nominations are one of the quieter constitutional-adjacent powers that members of Congress hold. And there is nothing about being in the majority or minority party that changes how this happens, but Republicans talk about this responsibility much more often than Democrats do, though both have sent more messages mentioning it over time. The reason every member has this role is because the system was designed to ensure that the officer corps is drawn from every corner of the country.

Federal law authorizes members of Congress to nominate candidates for appointment to four of the five U.S. service academies:

• U.S. Military Academy at West Point

• U.S. Naval Academy

• U.S. Air Force Academy

• U.S. Merchant Marine Academy

The U.S. Coast Guard Academy is the exception. It does not require a congressional nomination. This is because the Military Academy (West Point), the Naval Academy (Annapolis), the Merchant Marine Academy and the Air Force Academy fall under the Department of Defense (DoD) whereas the Coast Guard is under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime owing to it’s sort of hybrid identity in that it’s a military branch, but also a law enforcement agency, and a humanitarian organization that does rescues.

Service academy nominations exist because Congress historically wanted civilian elected officials involved in selecting military leadership pipelines; each member of Congress has a limited number of nominations they can submit each year. Because of this cap, congressional offices often run structured application processes to determine which students they will nominate.

I’m writing about this now because a number of offices just kicked off the process for the following year, so it’s starting to show up in DCinbox, but as in previous years there are partisan differences. Total mentions of academy nominations in official e-newsletters:

• Republicans: 4,205

• Democrats: 1,733

This does not mean Republicans are submitting more nominations, but it does show a difference in communication strategy. Republicans are far more likely to highlight service academy opportunities, to talk about military service pathways, remind constituents about nomination application deadlines, and they run messages about honoring local students receiving nominations. These topics fit into broader themes often emphasized in more in Republican messaging than in Democratic authored ones: military service, national defense, service as patriotism, and support of veterans.

I think the DCinbox data reflects a key difference in how each party defines its relationship with the military to the public. By broadcasting these opportunities Republicans are reinforcing a narrative of patriotism and national defense directly to the voter’s inbox.