Lori Falce: Language behind latest Santos expulsion vote is troubling, Mr. Speaker

On Wednesday, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson spoke about his misgivings over efforts to expel U.S. Rep. George Santos, R-New York.

It’s been a complicated line for the Republican Party, Johnson and former speaker Kevin McCarthy to walk since the Santos saga of untruths and criminal charges has unspooled over the past year.

There have been previous attempts to expel him, but some — including Democrats — have supported letting the process play out. That happened, in part, with the conclusion of the House Ethics Committee investigation Nov. 16 that cited “overwhelming evidence” of criminality.

Surviving again might be difficult as Johnson articulated the party’s position.

“We’re going to allow people to vote their conscience,” he said.

That means Republicans who find Santos a liability might take the opportunity to remove him a year early. Santos, although contemptuous, already had agreed to suspend his reelection campaign under pressure after the ethics report.

But it’s the language of Johnson’s statement that gives me pause. I hate the politics of it. It isn’t the partisanship but the very cynical mathematics of it that could come from any party.

By saying that, this time, people are free to vote the way they believe they should vote means that, sometimes, they aren’t. It implies that, previously, members of Congress wanted to vote to expel a man who has been all but shunned by his party but were not allowed.

And it is completely in keeping with actions we have seen on both sides of the aisle. To be a member of a party is to be a member of a gang, with the same enemies and friends, rules and expectations.

McCarthy didn’t follow the rules when he brokered a budget deal that involved compromise. He was promptly booted out of leadership. Democrats have been more in line than the Rockettes when it came to their similar voting.

Do all of these people really have such identical ideology? Is that even possible? Perhaps it is my “cafeteria Catholic” roots showing, but I don’t really trust any thinking that comes in lockstep. I don’t think any philosophy — whether academic, political or religious — is a perfect fit for everyone, so unanimity as a default puzzles me.

More than anything, however, the idea that any legislator would not be free to vote their conscience feels downright immoral. A legislator is sent not to do the will of the party but the will of the people. The voters of a district select the person whose views they believe best represent their own and expect that person to vote accordingly.

It is not up to leadership to free any member of their party to vote their conscience. That should be the presumption.

Will Santos be expelled? It seems likely, but it’s up to every representative to look at the ethics report, examine the facts and consider the weight of removing him before his day in court. There are understandable concerns about a vote either way that has nothing to do with support for his behavior.

But this vote is not special because Johnson has let his lawmakers off the leash. Every vote cast in the Capitol should be a vote of conscience.