The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Dereliction of Duty

Text Size

Dereliction of Duty

By Quin Hillyer on 2.1.09 @ 1:27PM

UPDATE: BASED ON MISLEADING REPORTING ELSEWHERE THAT I DIDN'T DOUBLE-CHECK, I ERRED: PUTNAM is SERVING OUT HIS TERM! (THE BASIC POINT I MAKE PHILOSOPHICALLY DOESN'T CHANGE, THOUGH.)

So now we see Judd Gregg of New Hampshire apparently leaving an almost entirely safe Senate seat to become Commerce Secretary, at a time when his party is just one vote from losing its ability to filibuster -- and now we also see Rep. Adam Putnam planning to leave Congress to run for Ag Secretary of Florida. Both are examples of a growing epidemic of serious dereliction of duty. I have complained about this in the past, but now the complaint is becoming a fury. Here's the deal: When you put yourself up for election before the voters, you are promising them that you will take the job to which they elect you for the duration of the term for which you are elected. You therefore have a duty to serve out that term -- yes, dammit, a DUTY -- unless you suffer some sort of tragedy or big family problem, or you are ill, or you are promoted to a clearly higher office that your constituents would approve. Otherwise, leaving an office in the middle of a term is a dereliction of duty.

Leaving deprives your constituents of the representation they voted for. It necessitates a special election, which costs taxpayers' money. And it inconveniences just about everybody. Also, in the case of Gregg, it hurts the party that gave him its backing, at a time when it can least afford to be hurt. In the case of Putnam, it makes no sense: He could run for Ag Sec while he serves in Congress; voters know that when they elect politicians, those politicians will spend time politiciking. THe implicit promise is that you will do the actual public-office job thoroughly and well even if you are spending time trying to get elected to another office. If you can't do that, then don't run for your current office in the first place.

Gregg and Putnam are being self-centered and selfish. They merit loud raspberries. Very loud. Plus ostracism. And maybe worse.

View all comments (7) | Leave a comment

Interested Conservative| 2.1.09 @ 2:07PM

With respect Mr. Hillyer, please elaborate and distinguish on these instances.

I see arguable differences - namely Sen. Gregg is reaching a career terminal position, while Rep. Putnam is shifting to toward an advance, certainly going state-wide, and likely positioning for a Gov. or Senate run.

Granted that the argument for leaving during the term is sound, there's also the nature of the deaparture post - a 6-year term vs. a 2-year term.

Finally, there's the ongoing policy effects, which weigh much more in Rep. Putnam's favor than a likely titular post for Sen. Gregg as a "bi-partisan" cover for contrary partisan action.

The Gregg move seems to merit much more derision, all things considered.

ConservativeWanderer| 2.1.09 @ 3:16PM

Come on, Sen. Gregg has a lifetime ACU rating of 78.39... that's lower than McCain, lower than Mel Martinez, lower than Richard Lugar, even lower than the two Tennessee Senators, Alexander and Corker, who caved to the Dems on the recent SCHIP vote.

What in the world makes you think that Gregg would stand up to the Dems, rather than kowtowing like a tame lapdog, like so many of the other weak-kneed Republicans in the Senate?

Mary| 2.1.09 @ 3:29PM

Speaking of dereliction of duty, this piece by Reid Buckley is a wonderfully comprehensive read. Here’s an excerpt:

I wonder—I am nagged by the doubt—has the disheartening failure of the conservative movement on the domestic front, dating from the second Reagan administration, been anywhere sufficiently acknowledged or analyzed by our great conservative institutions of scholarly learning? Has sodomy become the groovy kinkiness in our society? Is prayer ever to be restored to our schools? Are the unborn in America never to be safeguarded? And our infirm or derelict elderly—are they now to be at the mercy of the avariciousness of their heirs or the parsimony of the state? Will ever an amendment to the Constitution win through defining the Republic now and forever as Christian bred and born and deliberately affirmed at the founding, putting the quietus to secularists, who seek to desacralize society as well as life?

Recall heroic General Armistead pinning his hat on the tip of his sword and—thrusting the blade high, yelling to his brave men to follow—charging through the Union line on Cemetery Ridge, at once to fall mortally wounded. That’s been called the high-water mark of the Confederacy. Did the high-water mark of the 20th-century conservative movement of the United States take place back in December 1995/January 1996 when—in what might as well have been a railroad car’s tobacco-sodden men’s room, among the cuspidors—squat, puffy Newt Gingrich stonewalled smooth, sleazy Bill Clinton?

Judging from the political deportment of the Republican Congresses and the White House in domestic matters since that time, has anyone had the audacity, courage, and honesty to tell the bald truth—which is that the Republican Party has failed the cause to which my brother Bill and so many other brilliant souls—Frank Meyer, Jim Burnham, John Chamberlain, to mention just a few—gave unstintingly of their lives? Is any establishment conservative organ today declaring unequivocally that conservatives who have any respect at all for the political philosophy they profess must forswear the Republican Party and on many major issues break ranks with government-trusting (and agnostic) neocons? Or is that fresh young mind this minute deciding that whatever the right wing says about anything is tired polemics from which candor and the imagination have long since leaked out?

[..]

On the political level, then, what will be the future of American civilization as far as we conservatives are concerned? Why, of knaves and charlatans on both sides of the aisle driving the Republic headlong into a metastatic colossus of a state in which the citizen has been reduced to a hapless serf; in which blunt, honest language has been euphemized out of existence; and in which a bland and servile acceptance of the inevitability of Big Brother is the received wisdom.

Where are our Friedrich Hayeks of The Road to Serfdom, our Eric Voegelins of The New Science of Politics, our Russell Kirks of The Conservative Mind? Where is our philosopher? Meantime, on the practical front, what can conservatives do? The very first thing is to dissociate from the Republican Party, which has become an albatross around the neck of integrity.

In case link doesn’t work: http://tinyurl.com/df4nlc

Keith Rupp| 2.1.09 @ 3:32PM

Congressman Putnam is NOT leaving office early. He is committed to serving out the term to which he was elected.

Robin Mecham| 2.1.09 @ 9:04PM

I disagree with Mr. Rupp. Mr. Putnam left his office -- representing the people of Florida's 12th District -- the minute he drank George Bush's koolaide. No "representative" can vote with the executive 98.7% of the time and claim he or she is doing his or her job as a constitutional check and balance.

ConservativeWanderer| 2.1.09 @ 10:07PM

"No "representative" can vote with the executive 98.7% of the time and claim he or she is doing his or her job as a constitutional check and balance."

Does the same apply to Democrats voting with Obama?

Pete| 2.2.09 @ 10:13AM

As a constituent of Mr. Putnam's district I am glad he is moving on. It is about time. He has been in Washington way too long and it has begun to show in the past two terms. The thirst for power by our "servants" can and in most cases will end up corrupting them. I supported Adam until it became apparent with Ag-jobs that he was serving an industry and not the people. When the first "bail out" was up in the house he was very active applying pressure to fellow republicans to ensure passage. I hold him accountable for the unconstitutional power grab our Government has made in the finanical area. I would be remiss if I did not say that to his credit he has been an unwavering supporter of the first amendment.

The 12th congressional district is a safe district for a real Conservative. I think the change may end up being a positive one for us all.

On election night no less, he gave very strong indication that he was interested in running for the Senate seat held by the hapless slug Martinez. So, he had been planning on making some sort of move for a while and felt free to say so even while the votes were still being counted.

And... the only way to control the corruption of power in OUR Government is to amend our Constitution forcing term limits on all elected to Federal Office.