Romney's Unsurprising Departure and the Continuing Goodbye to Sanity
The rational GOP Senators continue to depart Washington, and the country is poorer for it. Though, can you blame them?
Growing up in a conservative household, political discourse flowed like a river between my parents. From a young age, I was acquainted with the parties that define our political landscape: Republicans and Democrats. It was the year 2012, a presidential election year, and I recall being incredibly bored as my parents fixated their attention on the televised presidential debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney. Eventually my restlessness was tempered.
Turning my attention to the large television, I was moved by the words of Mr. Romney. His solutions of small-government conservatism, the sanctity of hard work, and his inspiring rhetoric must have stirred something within me. Even though I was only eight, I felt a profound resonance with the Republican ethos, a moment of political awakening that would define a large portion of my life.
Though I could not vote — I still felt I could help the cause. I embarked on an inefficacious quest to rally support for Mr. Romney in our school’s mock election, a decidedly uphill battle in liberal Montgomery County. I remember vividly warning classmates about the existential threat Michelle Obama posed to our school lunches. Attempting to secure a Republican win within the confines of school was a futile exercise, but how was I supposed to possibly know that. This was not my first encounter with the realm of lost causes, as my parents had previously enlisted my aid in erecting campaign signs for John McCain's ill-fated presidential bid four years prior.
Mr. Romney lost our school’s mock election, though by a slimmer margin than one would expect. Little did I know it was a foreboding omen. On that fateful November day, my family and I, along with countless others, watched solemnly as Ohio was called in favor of Mr. Obama, granting him another four years.
Fast forward to 2023, and my phone would ping with a notification from X, formerly known as Twitter, from the Senator's account. As I watched the newly uploaded video — I was blindsided. Mr. Romney announced his retirement from the politics and proceeded to castigate the direction of the Republican Party.
Preceding this, Mr. Romney had previously declined to run in 2016. Rather, Mr. Romney delivered a speech condemning, the then frontrunner, Donald Trump’s candidacy. He lampooned Mr. Trump, labeling him as a ‘con artist’ and ‘a phony...a fraud’. Front and center stage, he declared, "He's playing the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat." Joining the Republican resistance, Mr. Romney unsuccessfully attempted to persuade primary voters to engage in ‘tactical voting’ to deny Mr. Trump the necessary threshold to clinch the nomination.
Mr. Trump eventually bested Mrs. Clinton. In light of Mr. Trump’s victory the rumor mill went into overdrive hinting at Mr. Romney's potential appointment as Secretary of State in the new administration. Secretary of State was, historically, stepping stone towards the presidency, though this role has, in recent times, devolved into a consolation prize for failed presidential hopefuls. Mr. Romney's acumen in business, grasp of foreign affairs, and wise judgement would have undeniably positioned him as an ideal Secretary of State—so naturally Mr. Trump decided against selecting him.
And then — nothing. Until 2018 when Orrin Hatch, a titan of the Senate, announced his impending retirement. Mr. Romney then ran for the open Senate seat. Republican Utah gave him far more favorable prospects than when he had previously, albeit unsuccessfully, challenged Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts back in 1994.
Fending off a flurry of opposition from Utah’s far-right, he successfully became the Republican candidate. Coasting to victory, Mr. Romney no doubt felt a sense of pride at achieving what had obviously been the ‘apple of his eye’. The U.S Senate has long been held as the epitome of American politics though Mr. Romney would soon be surprised by its decomposition.
An excerpt from an upcoming biography "Romney, a Reckoning" courtesy of author McKay Coppins was released in The Atlantic. The excerpt chronicles Mr. Romney’s journey from being the embodiment of the party to becoming an persona non grata, stemming from his feud with Mr. Trump. And its contents are deeply disturbing.
Mr. Romney had arrived at the Senate with a naïve optimism. He concocted a plan to personally meet with all, ninety-nine, of his colleagues, a checklist of comprehensive goals he aimed to achieve, on matters such as deficits, climate change, and immigration reform. Mistakenly, as he would soon find out, Mr. Romney seemed to operate under the false perception that he had been elected to serve in the same Senate he had campaigned for back in the nineties — one before social media and C-SPAN superseded legislative priorities.
He lamented to Mr. Coppins about how the Senate was 'built around posturing and theatrics' with speeches delivered to empty chambers and inconsequential debates about obstructed legislation. Though he learned that most of his fellow Republicans shared the same disdain for Mr. Trump, at least in private, he was given a "chilly reception" by most of the conference. Much of this stemmed from Mr. Romney’s opinion piece written in the the Washington Post where he charged Mr. Trump with “not rising to the mantle of the office”:
To a great degree, a presidency shapes the public character of the nation. A president should unite us and inspire us to follow ‘our better angels.’ A president should demonstrate the essential qualities of honesty and integrity, and elevate the national discourse with comity and mutual respect. As a nation, we have been blessed with presidents who have called on the greatness of the American spirit. With the nation so divided, resentful and angry, presidential leadership in qualities of character is indispensable.
Mr. Romney felt that more of his Republican colleagues were naïve appeasers of the President, rather than outright supporters. He felt they "needed a nudge. A role model, perhaps." Then the first test emerged. When Mr. Trump pressured President Zelenskyy of Ukraine to investigate the Biden family's business dealings by withholding congressionally approved arms shipments Mr. Romney decried it as "wrong and appalling." The Democratic-controlled House filed articles of impeachment, creating a jury trial in the Republican-controlled Senate.
In a customary fashion typical of Mr. Trump, he responded with a barrage of tweets, assailing Mr. Romney's character and instead demanding his impeachment. For this, Mitch McConnell gave the President a stern reprimand in private. Subsequently, Mr. McConnell allegedly confided to Mr. Romney that: "It wasn't so much for you as for him. He's an idiot. He doesn't think when he says things. How stupid do you have to be to to not realize that you should not attack your jurors?" Mr. McConnell conveyed to Mr. Romney how fortunate he was: "You can say all the things that we all think."
Mr. Coppins wrote that preceding the impeachment trial:
He read and reread Alexander Hamilton’s treatise on impeachment, “Federalist No. 65.” He pored over the work of constitutional scholars and reviewed historical definitions of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” His understanding was that once the House impeached a president, senators were called on to set aside their partisan passions and act as impartial jurors.
Mr. Romney then found himself perplexed and in a state of bewilderment to learn that his fellow Republicans, rather than investigate the legality of the President's actions, were instead inclined to sidestep the trial altogether. Mr. McConnell elucidated to Mr. Romney, in a confidential meeting, that a contentious trial would estrange voters, pose a peril to members up for reelection, and instead advocated a swift decisive conclusion. Notably, Mr. McConnell refrained from mounting any defense of Mr. Trump's actions, as Mr. Romney astutely observed.
When the trial began, Mr. Romney, as a juror, laboriously took notes, studied, revised and attempted to decide his vote: "Interestingly, sometimes I think I will be voting to convict, and sometimes I think I will vote to exonerate," he wrote in his diary. Mr. Romney apparently was leaning towards acquittal, as the trial reached its conclusion.
In his journal, he rationalized the vote—Trump hadn’t explicitly told Zelensky he would withhold military aid until an investigation was open—but he also admitted a self-interested motive. “I do not at all want to vote to convict,” he wrote. “The consequences of doing so are too painful to contemplate.”
Mr. Romney's change of mind was precipitated by one key moment—a question by Senator Lindsey Graham. Mr. Graham poised that whether true or not “that the allegations still would not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.” He then felt motivated to not establish precedent that would enable this conduct to become the new norm.
Mr. Romney 'crossed the Rubicon,' making history as the inaugural Senator convict President of the same party. This turn of events caught me off guard completely, and I must admit it was an unexpected twist at the time. I held a dissenting view regarding his verdict. But, I couldn't help but admire Mr. Romney’s commitment to individual decision making.
As we know, 2020 would then descend into the saga of COVID and the presidential election. After Mr. Trump's oust from the White House, he embarked on a tirade of falsehoods and attempted to have his loyalists contest the election results in the Senate. However, after the riot on January 6, Mr. Romney for once appeared to be in lockstep with broader party sentiment. Almost every Republican Senator condemned Mr. Trump for his instigating actions.
This belief was shattered at his speech at Utah Republican Convention in spring of 2021. The Republican lawmaker, formerly the Republican standard-bearer, found himself facing an unexpectedly hostile crowd. His speech was heckled by an angry crowd of election deniers. Amidst the chaos, he focused his attention on a woman and her child seated in the front row. She had been screaming at him, prompting him to momentarily halt his speech.
He asked a question, that many of us wished we were in a position to ask, "Aren’t you embarrassed?"
However, during the Biden administration, Mr. Romney appeared to reclaim his title of Republican stalwart. He had frequent media appearances, articulated against Mr. Biden's policy shortcomings, built bridges with the Democrats, and helped advance key bipartisan legislation, specifically addressing gun reform and infrastructure improvements. One thought he might be enjoying the job.
But, he had still failed to achieve his earlier ambitions. Mr. Romney, like many of his age, struggled to grasp that the old vessel for accomplishment was gone. To quote Grand Moff Tarkin, from Star Wars, "the last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away." The senate consists of two flanks, on one side, progressives advocating for socialist policies that work neither in practice nor for the people. On the other flank, Republican provocateurs more interested in ‘owning the libs’ than in governance.
Earlier this year, Mr. Romney turned 76 — why he would choose to spend his twilight years among this crowd? Obviously he instead chose to quietly bow out.
He opted against making an endorsement in the 2024 GOP primary as he highlighted the seeming inevitably of a Trump nomination. "It's pretty clear the party is inclined to a populist demagogue message," he told the Washington Post. It is quite obvious that Mr. Romney was beat, shocked by the transformation of a party he led ten years before.
The Senate, our Republic's institution of deliberation, has come to mirror the decline of political discourse. Rather than expunge the bad faith actors, on both sides, it's the earnest individuals of principle who find themselves departing. The void of statesmanship and unity, will sadly become more and more apparent as time goes on.