In Defense of Ben Sasse

By Bobby Miller

Thursday, October 13, 2022

 

Over the last week, we’ve witnessed something that seemingly occurs only once every eon: widespread agreement among conservatives. It’s rare to see people across the right, from former president Donald Trump’s biggest supporters to his biggest detractors (and others in between), come together. But it appears no one unites people quite like Ben Sasse.

 

Last week, much to the delight of the Never Trump crowd and MAGA world, the Nebraska senator revealed his plans to leave Congress to serve as president of the University of Florida (UF). While Sasse seemed content with his choice, his political adversaries wasted no time before spiking the football, seeing in Sasse’s act all their priors confirmed.

 

Upon Sasse’s announcement, Tim Miller, the Bulwark’s writer-at-large, tweeted, “Excited for the youth of Florida who get to be molded by someone who will lecture them about the noble virtues after being unwilling to model them when tested by the moment.” Amanda Carpenter, another Never Trump commentator, wrote, “Ben Sasse is pursuing an opportunity in higher education? He’s perfect for that. That’s where people think about doing things but never do.” And, of course, the always sober-minded Jen Rubin piled on, saying, “Sasse is among those Rs who lacked the spine and courage to do what Liz Cheney has done.” She has further claimed that Sasse is a token conservative “affirmative action” hire for UF. This is a ludicrous assertion. Sasse, a Yale Ph.D., U.S. senator, former assistant secretary at HHS, and former university president, is eminently qualified for this role. The notion that he’s ill-equipped or too partisan to lead the university is preposterous.

 

All of these criticisms suggest a special animus toward Sasse — one that is not applied, for example, to Liz Cheney. Like Sasse, Cheney did not vote in favor of impeaching Trump the first time around, but did the second time. There is a case for this trajectory, both on prudential and moral grounds; the second impeachment involved offenses incomparably worse than those at issue in the first. Yet Miller now criticizes Sasse, not for having the same record on these truly consequential votes as Cheney, but for not going as all-in on anti-Republican sentiment after January 6 as Cheney has. That Sasse embodied such a middle way seems truly to rankle those incapable of similar tact.

 

Indeed, Sasse comported himself superbly during the Trump years. Unlike most Republicans, he neither joined the chorus of sycophants, nor allowed himself to be broken by The Donald as so many of the former president’s other critics did. He finessed a GOP primary contest in the Cornhusker State, skewering Trump when feasible or necessary, but never losing sight of conservative first principles. Ultimately, Sasse voted to convict Trump at his second impeachment trial for his role in the riot at the Capitol. Presented with a succession of tough choices, he managed to emerge from his time on the Hill with his integrity and dignity intact.

 

Would it have been nice if Sasse had spoken up even more about the perils of election denialism and the debasement of the GOP? Sure. But doing so would have entailed inefficaciously sacrificing all of his remaining political capital among Republicans at the altar of utopian perfectionism. If you still find yourself incensed by this reality, you’re better off directing your ire at the system and its incentives, which demand such behavior, than at Sasse.

 

Trump’s critics were not the only ones to gang up on Sasse. The ex-normie national conservative Josh Hammer tweeted, “With Ben Sasse poised to take over the Univ. of Florida presidency, the UF board (filled with DeSantis appointees) has given us both (1) A chance for a real conservative senator from Nebraska; and (2) A well-above-average, pro-campus speech university president. Win-win.” Florida house of representatives member and congressional candidate Anthony Sabatini went even further, writing, “The DUMBEST take on Con Inc. RINO Ben Sasse’s appointment as UF President is: ‘But he’s better than other liberal university presidents!’ Folks, raise your expectations for one damn moment THEY COULD HAVE CHOSEN ANYONE IN THE WORLD TO RUN UF They chose trash anti-MAGA Sasse.” The myopic focus on Trump as the sole criterion for authentic conservatism seems to vindicate Sasse’s lamenting those who view politics as all about the “weird worship of one dude.” It also ignores his conservative voting record.

 

Some were more even-keeled in their criticism of the Nebraskan legislator. National Review’s Philip Klein wondered why Sasse, though “undeniably intelligent and thoughtful,” ever wanted to be in the Senate in the first place if he had no apparent interest in legislating. Klein argued that Sasse will be a much better fit at UF. But if Sasse is too erudite for the Senate, what does that say about the state of the institution?

 

Klein is right about one thing: Sasse never belonged on the Hill as it is today. He’s an anachronism — a throwback to a bygone era in which the Senate actually lived up to its reputation as “the world’s greatest deliberative body” — because he is genuinely interested in ideas. Unlike national conservatives, who prioritize stoking grievances over advancing a concrete agenda, Sasse has shown a genuine interest in applying conservative principles to address the problems of the 21st century.

 

The notion that Sasse will be better situated as an academic is mistaken. At best, he’ll transform a single institution. But as a university administrator, he’ll have little influence on policy matters. Experts exiled to the jerkwater of academia often linger in obscurity.

 

Others lamented Sasse’s lack of legislative accomplishments. National Review’s Nate Hochman said that “it’s tough to ignore the fact that [Sasse] defined himself . . . in terms of his dissatisfaction with the fact that the legislative branch doesn’t legislate; all while being one of the least proactive legislators in said branch.”

 

This criticism misses a few things. For one, the number of bills introduced or passed is not the best metric by which to gauge the success of a senator’s time in office, especially in an era in which Congress has often rendered itself impotent, and is often complicit in bad policy when it does manage to rouse itself to action. Moreover, Sasse has focused on less sexy matters, such as national-security issues, that don’t grab as many headlines as those issues the chamber’s showboaters gravitate towards.

 

These critiques of Sasse fundamentally fail to capture the nature of their target and of the body in which he served for the past seven years. Instead of disparaging him, conservatives should be celebrating his tenure as one of the few senators worthy of praise at a time when the number of respectable members of Congress is declining precipitously.