OPINION: Today’s Republicans are no ‘Profiles in Courage’

The work of Congress has been below expectations lately. Too many lawmakers have been slaves to their party. Too many lawmakers are more concerned about their reelections than solving problems. Too many Republicans are intimidated by President Donald Trump. We have seen many reverse their positions on issues rather than risk his displeasure. Attention and action from the electorate are needed.

In John F. Kennedy’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book, “Profiles in Courage,” he discusses actions of particular men in history who displayed unusual bravery in politics. These were individuals who had the courage to follow their conscience, regardless of consequences and the possibility of being vilified by their peers.

One such example involves Sam Houston in his role as a senator from Texas. At that time, Southern Democrats were known for their support of, and protection of, the institution of slavery. A bill being discussed in the Senate in 1854, proposed by Democrats and named the Kansas-Nebraska Act, would repeal the Missouri Compromise of 1850. Among other things, the Missouri Compromise prohibited slavery beyond an established northern boundary in the Louisiana Territory. This new Kansas-Nebraska Act would have allowed slavery to extend beyond the northern boundary established by that earlier compromise.

Houston, then a young Congressman from Tennessee, had supported the Missouri Compromise in 1850. He considered it a “solemn compact between the North and South.” He eloquently begged his colleagues to refrain from creating new agitations over the slavery issue. As one might imagine, Southern Democrats were not amused by his remarks.

Houston undoubtedly knew that the measure would pass and that he would be alone among Democrats in his opposition. This, along with other actions of conscience, proved to be the “last straw” and ended his service in the Senate.

There have been other examples of political courage over the years. One such example involved the actions of many members of the legislative branch during the imminent impeachment of Richard Nixon in 1974. An investigation to determine the extent of Nixon’s involvement in a break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court ordering the release of Nixon’s taped conversations. Clearly, the Supreme Court of 1974 did not feel obliged to support the president. The tapes revealed Nixon’s blatant lies, fueling the already-launched impeachment proceedings by the House. When it became clear that the Senate was prepared to convict him, Nixon resigned the presidency. Nixon’s crimes justified impeachment and conviction. Congress would have delivered if he had not resigned.

During more recent times, we once again found ourselves engaged in the impeachment of a president. As a result of Trump’s extreme actions taken to dispute his 2020 loss in the presidential election, the House impeached him for “inciting an insurrection.” Only 10 of 211 House Republicans dared to vote in favor of impeachment. Several Republicans indicated that threats against them or their families were a factor in their vote. One of those voting for impeachment was Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, of Wyoming. Her vote enraged many of her fellow conservatives in the House. It certainly enraged Trump, and it was no surprise that he would seek revenge. This was easily accomplished in Cheney’s home state of Wyoming, where Trump received 70% of the votes in the 2020 election. But Cheney considered Trump’s actions the “greatest betrayal” by a U.S. president ever. She lost her seat in the 2022 Wyoming Republican primary election — a high price to pay for her courageous vote. Voters can scarcely expect courage from our representatives when they join in punishing them. Of the remaining representatives who voted to impeach Trump, only two remain in the House. The others were defeated or stepped down.

After the House voted to impeach Trump on the strength of the Democratic majority, it was necessary for the Senate to decide upon conviction, which would have ended his ability to ever again seek the presidency. Only seven Republican senators exhibited the courage to vote to convict. Neither of Idaho’s senators was among them. The case was clear. One would like to think there would have been more Republicans willing to stray from the party line.

A very significant distinction becomes apparent when comparing the Republicans of 1974 to those of today. Republicans of today served their political party with an eye on their prospects of reelection. The Republicans of Nixon’s day were loyal to the institution and the people they served.

In order for our republican form of government to succeed, it is essential that we elect members to Congress who are guided by facts, their consciences and what is best for the country. In the Federalist Papers, James Madison explained that liberty would be best protected by ensuring that the three branches of government are as little connected to each other as possible. This would mean that members of Congress would have to jealously guard and protect the legislative’s branch’s authority against exercises of executive power. It also means that members of Congress must place allegiance to their elected body first, House or Senate, and should work together for outcomes that are right for the people — not their party or themselves. Their results should be worthy of the institution that they serve.

Today, Trump has displayed an unusually expansive vision of executive authority. Trump has said that he has the right to do whatever he wants as president. He is doing just that. When the constitutional division of powers is challenged, its very survival depends on how members of Congress and respond. With few exceptions, so far, they have failed.

Voters should be dissatisfied with this performance. Members of the electorate share responsibility in effecting change. Candidates should pass the character test in order to earn votes. They should emulate the character of Sam Houston and Liz Cheney.

Ringo, of Moscow, is a former mathematics teacher and a seven-term Democratic member of the Idaho House.