We live in an extraordinary time in the United States, when the most pressing issue is not taxes or foreign policy or immigration, but whether our democracy survives. I heartily encourage voters, interviewers, debate moderators and opponents to make both incumbents and challengers for Congress lay out their policy views. More important, however, is to gauge their judgment on a variety of issues that go to the heart of our fraying democratic institutions and basic values:
What will you do if President Donald Trump fires the special counsel?
Did Russia interfere with our 2016 presidential election with the intention of aiding Trump/hurting Hillary Clinton?
Will you confirm a replacement for Attorney General Jeff Sessions and/or Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein before completion of the Russia probe?
Should the Senate Judiciary Committee insist on an independent investigation when a credible allegation is raised against a Supreme Court nominee?
Can a president commit obstruction of justice?
Is concealing payment(s) to former sexual partners, in violation of election laws, within the definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors”? Is firing officials who are investigating you? What about promising a pardon to a witness so he won’t testify?
Would you ever accept an offer of campaign help from a hostile foreign power? If someone tried to offer you such help, what would you do?
Was the pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio right or wrong?
Will you support a law requiring presidents to release their tax returns?
Are you concerned about conflicts of interest and/or receipt of foreign emoluments in the executive branch? What are you prepared to do about them?
Are there “some fine people” who are neo-Nazis? If you didn’t speak up to condemn the president’s remarks after Charlottesville, Va., why not?
Is the media the “enemy of the people”? Have you publicly objected when Trump has used that term?
Did 3 million to 5 million people vote illegally in 2016? If not, what is the danger in saying so, and why did you not repudiate the president’s baseless allegation?
If multiple, credible sources allege that the president is mentally unstable and/or incapable of processing information, what do you do?
A test of objective reality: Does man-made global warming exist? Do childhood inoculations cause serious conditions such as autism?
Where do they stand?
These are not policy questions per se, nor should they be viewed as partisan. That they are the least bit controversial or that Republicans would find it hard to balance support for Trump with the need to appear sane and pro-democratic (small “d”) tells you a lot about where the Republican Party is now. It also should underscore the danger in keeping both chambers in GOP control.
Republicans running in 2018 must convince voters that they will not be rubber stamps and irresponsible enablers for Trump. That’s tough for incumbents, since so few Republicans have avoided those pitfalls since January 2017.
Republican challengers who’ve remained mute while Trump has trashed democratic institutions, issued more than 5,000 lies and demonstrated contempt for the rule of law should be eyed warily. If we are to weather the remainder of Trump’s term (whether it lasts until January 2021 or not), we will need a Congress that views itself as a co-equal branch of government, not a handmaiden to his party or president.
We’ve reached a time when there is little margin for error. Voters must be certain that they are putting someone in office who will hinder Trump’s destructive tendencies rather than encourage them. Vote wisely.
Jennifer Rubin is an opinion writer for The Washington Post. Twitter: @JRubinBlogger
