Quite a few U.S. House Republicans have stirred up trouble for their party’s small majority this year. But the four House members from Iowa—Representatives Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA-01), Ashley Hinson (IA-02), Zach Nunn (IA-03), and Randy Feenstra (IA-04)—have generally aligned with the preferences of GOP caucus leaders. It has been rare for to even one of the Iowans to vote differently from top Republicans in the chamber, and they have never done so as a group.

That streak ended on December 1, when Miller-Meeks, Hinson, Nunn, and Feenstra all voted to expel U.S. Representative George Santos.

Santos is only the sixth U.S. House member ever to be expelled, and the 311 to 114 vote (roll call) divided Republicans. While 105 GOP members joined almost all Democrats to remove Santos from their ranks, 112 Republicans opposed the resolution, including the whole leadership team of House Speaker Mike Johnson, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Majority Whip Tom Emmer, Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, and Republican Policy Chair Gary Palmer.

In May, following the first federal indictment of Santos, Iowa’s delegation joined most of their GOP colleagues to refer a motion to expel their colleague to the House Ethics Committee. Even after federal prosecutors charged Santos with more crimes, the four Iowans stuck with most of the GOP caucus and voted against another motion to expel in early November. At that time, most Republicans and some Democrats thought it would be premature to oust a House member when he had not been convicted of any crimes, and the Ethics Committee had yet to publish its findings.

In mid-November, that committee released the results of its investigation, which concluded that

there was substantial evidence that Representative George Santos: knowingly caused his campaign committee to file false or incomplete reports with the Federal Election Commission; used campaign funds for personal purposes; engaged in fraudulent conduct in connection with RedStone Strategies LLC; and engaged in knowing and willful violations of the Ethics in Government Act as it relates to his Financial Disclosure (FD) Statements filed with the House. 

Miller-Meeks, Hinson, Nunn, and Feenstra all called on Santos to resign within 24 hours of the ethics report’s release, and promised to vote to expel him if he refused to do so. Santos declined to step down, citing the principles of due process and a presumption of innocence.

Prior to this week’s vote, Speaker Johnson indicated leaders would not whip GOP members to support or oppose expelling Santos. Many Republicans expressed concern about setting a bad precedent. Prior to the vote on Santos, the only two House members to be expelled since the 1860s (Michael Myers in 1980 and Jim Traficant in 2002) were removed from Congress after being convicted of crimes.

As a practical matter, House leaders may have feared the prospect of shrinking the tenuous GOP majority. A Democratic candidate could win the coming special election in New York’s third district, covering part of Long Island.

Iowa’s delegation wanted to be on the record opposing Santos and his behavior. Nunn said in a December 1 statement,

Those who serve in elected office should be held to the highest possible ethical standard. George Santos probably couldn’t even find the word ethics in a dictionary. He has repeatedly proven to be a con man, and there’s no doubt in my mind that he should be in prison, not the House of Representatives.  While he will continue to receive due process in a court of law for his criminal liability, the Constitution dictates that the House of Representatives is responsible for determining the fitness to serve of its own Members. To that end, George Santos has received lengthy due process through the House Ethics Committee and the results are clear: he is unfit to serve.

The bottom line is that the American people are sick and tired of Washington, D.C. backroom deals that protect crooks and liars. Expelling George Santos is the right move, but it is not the only step that must be taken to restore the American people’s trust in our government. The Senate must now follow the lead of the House of Representatives and immediately expel Robert Menendez for his egregious ethical lapses, including accepting bribes from foreign governments while serving as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

To serve the American people, both Republicans and Democrats must put the best interests of our country ahead of political expediency.

Miller-Meeks said in a statement,

Having followed due process in the House, in consideration of the scathing House Ethics Committee report documenting considerable evidence of criminal activity, including fraud, and after listening to my constituents, today, I voted to expel Rep. George Santos.

The Senate should also conduct due process and consider the expulsion of Sen. (Bob) Menendez, who has been indicted for the second time. Members and elected officials must be held to a higher standard. This is especially important as we continue to investigate the Biden crime family and consider an upcoming vote for an impeachment inquiry to hold President Biden accountable. I did not take this vote lightly, but I believe that we must act on our values and condemn the criminal activities of George Santos, which are not befitting of a member of Congress.

Hinson posted on X/Twitter,

As I said, if George Santos didn’t resign, I would vote to expel him. His conduct is beneath public office and he is unfit to serve in Congress. We should focus on solving the challenges facing the American people & he should deal with his legal challenges as a private citizen.

I have not seen new comments from Feenstra; his staff directed the Des Moines Register to Feenstra’s X/Twitter posts following the release of the ethics report in November. At that time, Feenstra explained that he gave Santos “the time needed for an ethics report following his indictments,” but said Santos “has proven that his ethics do not align with what we expect from our leaders,” and should be expelled “for his illegal and unethical behavior should he choose not to do the right thing and resign.”

UPDATE: Iowa’s delegation did not highlight this vote in their weekly email newsletters to constituents. The motion to expel Santos was not mentioned at all in emails sent on December 1 from the offices of Hinson, Nunn, or Feenstra. Miller-Meeks buried a reference to that vote near the bottom of her December 3 “Weekly Script” and did not mention Santos in her “weekly wrap-up” on YouTube, where she discussed “two very substantial votes.”