Understanding Republican Senator Mitt Romney’s Concerns About Constitutional Beliefs

Senator Mitt Romney, a prominent member of the Republican Party, expressed deep concerns about the ideological shift within his party, stating, “A very large portion of my party really doesn’t believe in the Constitution.” This candid remark was shared with biographer McCay Coppins following the harrowing events of January 6th, when a violent mob attempted to disrupt the certification of the 2020 election results. Romney’s observations stem from his firsthand experience during the chaos, where he and fellow Senators faced a terrifying assault from Trump supporters. In the upcoming biography Romney: A Reckoning, he elaborates on the troubling reasons behind his belief that many in his party have strayed from the foundational principles of the Constitution.

In previous discussions, I explored the creeping authoritarianism that Republicans now express concern about, which is driven by a brand of political terrorism that influences voting patterns within the party. This erosion of fundamental constitutional values represents a critical factor contributing to democratic backsliding, highlighting the need for vigilance in protecting democratic institutions and ideals.

One particularly striking passage from the biography reveals how Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell guided his party toward neglecting their constitutional responsibilities during Trump’s first impeachment trial. This trial arose from Trump’s attempts to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival, Joe Biden. Instead of focusing on their duty to uphold the Constitution, McConnell urged Republicans to prioritize the preservation of their political power at all costs, suggesting that the admission of Puerto Rico and D.C. as states would threaten their majority status. McConnell’s argument essentially posited that if the American electorate were fairly represented, Republicans would likely lose their grip on power.

During the impeachment proceedings, McConnell pressured Utah Republican Senator Romney to vote for a swift end to the trial, even before hearing the full opening arguments. This maneuver aimed to shield vulnerable Republicans from potential backlash. McConnell didn’t defend Trump’s actions; instead, he framed the party’s majority as a pressing national concern. He ominously forecasted Trump’s potential defeat in the next election and warned of dire consequences should Democrats gain control of Congress—such as the transformation of Puerto Rico and D.C. into states that would solidify a permanent Democratic majority and enable leftist legislation like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. Romney found himself in a moral quandary, unable to guarantee his vote amidst the mounting pressure. McConnell, however, declined to comment on their private conversation.

The subsequent GOP caucus meeting included a visit from Vice President Mike Pence, who elaborated on the Trump defense strategy with the Senators serving as jurors. At the next meeting, McConnell escalated the stakes, insisting that Republicans should not perceive the impeachment trial as a judicial process, but rather as a political maneuver. This perspective suggested that adherence to the Constitution was secondary to maintaining political power and party loyalty.

“At the next meeting, McConnell emphasized that the upcoming trial should not be viewed as a genuine trial at all. ‘This is a political process,’ he stated, encouraging his colleagues to act accordingly. ‘If impeachment is merely a partisan political process, it could just as well be removed from the Constitution,’ Romney recalled muttering quietly to Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, who chose to ignore his remarks. This framing of the impeachment trial as ‘just a political process’ quickly dominated media narratives, despite its inaccuracy, as Senator Romney discovered through his research.

The Boston Globe aptly summarized the essence of the constitutional requirement during impeachment, noting that when Senators “try impeachments,” they are mandated to take an oath that differs from their legislative oath. While legislators pledge to support and defend the Constitution, the impeachment oath explicitly calls for them to “do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws,” akin to the responsibilities of jurors.

Although many aspects of the Constitution are open to interpretation, the principle of impartial justice is not merely a matter of debate; it stands in stark contrast to a political process. This distinction is vital for maintaining the integrity of democratic governance and ensuring that justice prevails over political expediency.

Despite acknowledging that Trump was “nailed” by the evidence presented, McConnell himself did not accept Trump’s defense that he was merely investigating corruption related to the Bidens. This point is particularly notable given that Republicans are now seeking to impeach President Biden on similar allegations, yet without substantial evidence or credible claims. During a break in the proceedings, after the impeachment managers concluded their presentations, Romney encountered McConnell, who candidly stated, “They nailed him.” This forthright admission left Romney surprised, prompting a cautious response: “Well, the defense will say that Trump was just investigating corruption by the Bidens.”

McConnell’s retort, “If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge I can sell you,” underscores the skepticism even among Republicans regarding Trump’s justification. This exchange highlights the moral dilemmas faced by party members, particularly for someone like Romney, who grapples with the implications of his party’s choices. It appears that Romney’s own struggles with Trump’s actions are significant enough that his spouse, Ann, expressed disappointment when he initially leaned towards acquitting Trump. Long-term political engagement can lead to a skewed perception of reality, where individuals may become insulated from the broader implications of their actions. Nevertheless, Romney persists in striving for a position aligned with his principles, ultimately reflecting on his role in allowing the party’s drift towards authoritarianism.

Ultimately, Senator Romney contemplates his legacy and the lessons he wishes to impart to his children and grandchildren. This perspective may stem from the values instilled in him by his father. While Romney has often enjoyed privileges afforded by wealth and opportunity, this may have contributed to a certain blindness regarding his party’s trajectory. Nonetheless, it is undeniable that he has stood firm in the face of adversity, prioritizing integrity over allegiance to power. His willingness to challenge the caesars who have discarded constitutional values in pursuit of sheer power will be a defining aspect of his legacy, alongside his cautionary insights regarding the inner workings of his party.