George Santos has been kicked out of the US House of Representatives. Is this good news for American democracy?
Santos, as you can read in mind-numbing detail on his Wikipedia page, is a serial liar and faces multiple criminal charges. If that makes someone unfit for elected office, then why is Donald Trump even considered as a potential candidate in 2024?
Friday’s vote was the third attempt to evict him from Congress. I’m wondering why expulsion was necessary. Isn’t he innocent of the charges against him until proven guilty? Was he kicked out for being a liar? If so, who cast the first stone?
I don’t pay much attention to American Congressional politics. I think the system is mostly broken and there is no will to fix it. All I know about Santos is what I read – and I certainly wouldn’t vote for him.
What is concerning though is lawmakers voting to expel one of their own. Shouldn’t that be the voters’ job?
US Representatives serve two-year terms – he would be facing an election in 2024 (though he had already said he would not be running again). Why the rush?
Only five other people have been expelled from the House. Three supported the Confederacy in the US Civil War, the other two had been convicted of major crimes. While the cases against Santos may look like a slam dunk, it strikes me as early to be expelling him.
There are other ways lawmakers can voice their disapproval of one of their number. Kicking someone out who was democratically elected to me sets a dangerous precedent.
The vote to expel Santos was bipartisan, but what about the future? Couldn’t the party with the majority of seats in the House start expelling members of the minority party? What is to stop them?
Am I the only one who sees this as a problem?
random thoughts from lorne 
I’m hoping you are the only one, Lorne. Sorry! At the very least, you could argue both sides before plumping down in favour of feeling outraged and defending such a poor excuse for a Congressman.
What you have written seems to point to a more general problem for me. That a man who gets elected by lying and misrepresenting himself to trick people into voting for him should retain the fruits of his deception until the voters get the chance to unseat him? That seems to be your argument. A congressional investigation led by his own party should be disregarded? Half the Republicans voted to expel him! Is your anger directed at them rather than the lying deceiver?
If what you are saying, you a relatively fair minded blue Tory, represents what Canadian Conservatives think and are willing to say publicly, then I, a red Tory, will be uncomfortable supporting them going forward.
If the Liberals do the sensible thing and dump Mr. Trudeau, it’s hard to see the centrists like myself supporting this iteration of Conservatism. If Trudeau survives, it’ll be more of a toss up.
As I understand it, Santos’s untruths were fairly well known before his election, and people voted for him anyway.
I’m not saying that he shouldn’t be punished by his peers, just that expulsion sets a dangerous precedent.
I’m not angry – Congress is probably a better place without him. But I wonder if expulsion will become a political too in much the same way impeachment has in recent years. If I had had a vote I might have opted to vote “present.”
I have no idea what Canadian Conservatives think on this matter. And in those areas where I do know what Conservatives think, I usually find myself in disagreement.
Given the polls, I expect a Canadian election sooner rather than later. The Liberals want to lose with Justin Trudeau rather than replace him with someone who will have to wear his policies. If he goes before the election, his successor will join Kim Campbell and John Turner in the sacrificial lamb category.o
Hi Lorne; It takes 2/3 in favour to expel a Congressman. This was the third attempt to unseat Santos. Given the usual split of the 2 parties, a fair number of the minority party would have to vote in favour. Thus, I think the concern you expressed that a majority party could expel minority members unilaterally was alarmist. A fair analysis would have pointed this out. No?
Nonetheless, overall I enjoy your blog and think what you are doing very worthwhile. My criticism is very particular and in no way broader than that. The Red and Blue are mainly comrades in arms.
All the best, Neil
Alarmist? Perhaps. But given the state of politics in Canada and the US today, I’m not sure
Should I have printed out the 2/3 requirement? Absolutely. My only excuse is that I wrote the post quicker than usual and didn’t review it before pushing the publish button.