Perils of Principles for Politicians

One of the more dramatic political stories this month was the news that David Davis, a Member of Parliament, resigned in protest over plans to extend detention of terrorist suspects up to 42 days. Whether or not you agree with the disputed legislation or the form of disagreement there's something refreshing about a politician who is willing to step down as a statement of principle. I am aware of a few other British government officials who had taken similar steps; Robin Cook resigned as leader of the House of Commons in March 2003 and a few months later Clare Short resigned from Tony Blair's cabinet over the Iraq war. Although not exactly a model politician, you could possible include George Galloway in the list of MPs willing to take a stand since his openly anti-war rhetoric led to expulsion from his own party. 

I was curious to contrast the resignations from Parliament with resignations from the US House and Senate. A quick Google search tells a very different story between American and British politicians.

• Senator Trent Lott resigned in 2007 over racially insensitive comments made at the birthday of a fellow Senator.
• Speaker of the House Tom Delay resigned in 2006 after being indicted on a charge of conspiracy.
• Representative Mark Foley resigned in 2006 after his raunchy IMs to teenage boys were uncovered.
• Senator Larry Craig submitted a resignation in 2007 after being arrested for lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.

It is unfair to judge a country's politicians by the resignation of a few, but it's hard to deny there is a pretty clear pattern here. Members of the US Congress have a tendency to fall afoul of societal norms and principles and lose their position as a result, while British politicians are keen to uphold a principle at the expense of their position.