Republican losses improve their party

The Republican congressional landslide of 1994 came about because the candidates made a lot of promises to work for less government at the federal level. Since that time, Republicans in Washington have fallen steadily away from the principles that brought them the congressional majority. As a result, conservative voters have become less and less excited about Republican candidates. The trend has culminated with the 2006 election, in which the voters passed the reigns of leadership to the Democrats.

I thought it would be interesting to see whether there was anything in common in the voting records of losing Republicans in Congress. I looked at their Conservative Index scores, as well as several key votes, to see how these legislators had behaved during their tenure.

The votes that I examined for House members included an amendment by Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) to the 2007 Defense Appropriations bill. This would have barred funding for any military action against Iran without a congressional declaration of war, as required by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Every single losing Republican representative who was present for that vote came out against the amendment. All of these representatives betrayed their oaths of office, in which they promised to defend the Constitution.

The trend toward ceding our liberties to advance the fight against terrorism was represented by two key votes. H.R. 6166 sets up a system of military tribunals to try so-called "enemy combatants." When the government designates a person as an unlawful enemy combatant, jurisdiction over his case moves from the civil judiciary to the military. In that system, his rights to habeas corpus, speedy trial and other constitutional protections are ignored. If this applied only to non-citizens in a non-US war zone, it might be reasonable. Since it applies to anyone at all and inside the US, it is an abominable offense against the Constitution.

Along the same lines is H.R. 5825, which allows warrantless electronic surveillance in terrorism cases. The Fourth Amendment requirement for warrants upon probable cause does not make exceptions for terrorism or any other classes of crime. If we allow the government to declare such exceptions without a constitutional amendment, we are no longer ruled by our fundamental law. The sky's the limit for expansion of federal powers.

Every single losing representative who was present for the votes supported both of these egregious violations of the Constitution. I cannot regret the loss of any of these Republicans, no matter what kind of radical Democrats may have replaced them. As far as I'm concerned, the voters have simply purged undesirable members from office. There isn't room here for details, but the Senate appears to have followed a similar pattern.

The source of this problem, of course, is party loyalty that many Republicans (and most Democrats) hold to be more important than their oaths to defend the Constitution. A rogue Republican in the White House can accomplish more in the cause of big government than any Democrat, because most Republicans in Congress will rubber stamp his initiatives.

My advice to Republicans is to find new candidates for Congress, rejecting any current or former members who have shown that they cannot be trusted to limit the size and scope of government, as required by the Constitution. No second chances for the oath violators.