Editorial: Pennsylvania delegation did its job | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Editorial: Pennsylvania delegation did its job

1825515_web1_CongressNew116

We don’t just give power to political parties. We vest that power in individuals for a reason.

We elect lawyers with military backgrounds like Rep. Conor Lamb, D-Mt. Lebanon, and Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Peters. We elect people who have been involved in government since before the Pirates last won a World Series, like Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Forest Hills, and others who had a long career in business before they jumped in the political waters, like Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Butler.

We elect them because of how they are like us, and how they are different from us, and how we hope they will work with the other politicians and how we hope they will walk their own path.

And that is why, regardless of how anyone feels about President Trump or the impeachment investigation, Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation did its job Wednesday when the House of Representatives delivered a rare rebuke to the White House on the withdrawal from Syria.

What was even rarer was that it was not a Democrat versus Republican vote. It was legislators versus executive, with a vote of 354-60 that meant 129 GOP members joining the condemnation.

We elect people, not party.

The idea that 16 representatives of the evenly split 18-member Pennsylvania delegation voted for the rebuke is as admirable as the fact that two didn’t.

It shows that they considered an issue, gave it the weight it deserved and made a decision. It illustrates that those diverse backgrounds that sent an Hollidaysburg dermatologist and a Centre County nursing home administrator and a Philadelphia schoolteacher to Washington did what they were supposed to do.

It is easy to agree with your friends. It is easy to do what is expected. The seven Pennsylvania Republicans who didn’t were strong enough to examine an issue and deliver a sober and reflective vote on it, despite it going against a party leader with a strong Keystone State following.

It was just as hard for the two who didn’t follow suit (Rep. John Joyce, R-Hollidaysburg, and Rep. Dan Meuser, R-Luzerne County). They stood by their beliefs in the face of the majority of their colleagues — both in the party and in the state — and cast their votes accordingly.

For too long, Congress has been a predictable math problem. There are this number of Democrats and this number of Republicans, so the vote on any issue would be the same.

But the public doesn’t elect a nameless red or blue hash mark on a scoreboard. We elect people who will sometimes make decisions that are in line with their friends and sometimes stand against them.

And it is the votes that are not along party lines that say the most.

Categories: Opinion | Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.