Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has made a name for herself in Congress as a bit of a pariah, especially as of late. On the Right, she is known as a moderate, or even liberal, version of a Republican. Her stance on issues such as abortion, which she supports, makes her decidedly not conservative. Since she doesn’t always fit into the expected box, her decisions are sometimes rather surprising.
In October 2018, after contentious Senate confirmation hearings, Collins delivered a speech that angered the president’s opponents and paved the way for Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Senate confirmation. In her statements, Collins walked through her concerns and conclusions about the nominee. Referencing the major eleventh-hour sexual assault allegations brought by Christine Blasey Ford, the senator highlighted their serious nature while also concluding that the evidence, or lack thereof, did not prove that Kavanaugh was the assailant.
It was a moment when a Trump-critical member of Congress based a monumental decision on facts rather than feelings. As a result, Collins was despised by Democrats and praised by Republicans. It was a partisan response to a very measured action.
On Tuesday, history seemed to repeat itself as Collins announced her intention to vote against the articles of impeachment. She said:
“Impeachment of a president should be reserved for conduct that poses such a serious threat to our governmental institutions as to warrant an extreme step of immediate removal from office. I do not believe that the House has met its burden in showing that the president’s conduct, however flawed, warrants the extreme step of removal from office.”
In an era of fierce partisanship, where loyalty to one’s tribe is seemingly more important than adherence to principles, this fact-based approach is refreshing. With Kavanaugh, Collins realized that unsubstantiated sexual assault claims are not enough to reject a polarizing president’s nominee for the highest court in the land. Likewise, in the impeachment saga, the burden of proof rests on the House, which brought forth the articles in the first place. When reviewing what has been presented, Collins correctly found it did not justify the extreme step of removing the president from office.
It is important to note that in her decision, Collins did not infer that President Trump’s actions were perfect, as he loudly declared in January. She readily admitted that his behavior was far from flawless. However, it does not meet the level necessary for expulsion. While many of her congressional colleagues arrive at an all-or-nothing verdict, it is Collins’s sober review that stands out.
Since before he was inaugurated, some Democrats expressed a desire to see Trump impeached. This makes the calls for removal little more than partisan theatrics — especially when the evidence is weighed and found wanting. Proof of wrongdoing should be the source from which both politicians and voters alike draw from before reaching conclusions.
Collins may sometimes frustrate the Right with her anti-conservative tendencies and the Left with her perceived loyalty to the GOP. But more than once, she has shown herself to be an impartial judge. Her votes and explanations in the Kavanaugh confirmation and impeachment trial indicate how determined she is to follow the evidence — and that is commendable.
Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog and a columnist at Arc Digital.
