John Ratcliffe on Principles & Values

I place God at the center of all that I say or do

Ratcliffe: Strongly Disagree.

Question topic: Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality which permitted our system of limited government.

Ratcliffe: Strongly Agree.

Question topic: Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.

Ratcliffe: I am a Christian. I believe there is only one God--Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who is the creator of all people and of all things. I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, the perfect message for mankind and the final authority for all matters of faith. Because of my spiritual beliefs, I place God first in my daily life and try to keep Faith, Hope and Love at the center of all that I say or do. I know as humans we have the freedom of choice to decide what is right and what is wrong, but I look to Him for guidance in deciding what is right and wrong.

Member of the Republican Study Committee.

Organizational Self-Description: The Republican Study Committee (RSC) has served as the conservative caucus of House Republicans and a leading influencer on the Right since its original founding in 1973. It exists to bring like-minded House members together to promote a strong, principled legislative agenda that will limit government, strengthen our national defense, boost America's economy, preserve traditional values and balance our budget.

The RSC provides the tools and research that members of Congress need to craft and advance policies that will benefit the American people. It also provides a forum for like-minded members to join together to support common causes and challenge the status quo. By doing so, the RSC ensures that conservatives have a powerful voice on every issue coming before the House, whether it is the economy, health care, defense, social safety net reform, or Washington's dangerous, out-of-control spending.

We believe that the appropriate role of a limited government is to protect liberty, opportunity, and security, and that it is the responsibility of this generation to preserve them for the next. We believe that more government is the problem, not the sol

Impeachment attempts to undo the 2016 election.

On November 8, 2016, nearly 63 million Americans from around the country chose Donald J. Trump to be the 45th President of the United States. Now, less than a year before the next presidential election, 231 House Democrats in Washington, D.C., are trying to undo the will of the American people.

The Democrats' impeachment inquiry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct; it is an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system. The Democrats are trying to impeach a duly elected President based on the accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with President Trump's policy initiatives and processes. They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats were discomforted by an elected President's telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats chafed at an elected President's "outside the beltway" approach to diplomacy.

Past impeachments came from years-long investigations.

Impeachment of American president demands the accuser prioritize legitimacy and thoroughness over expediency. In the impeachment inquiries for Presidents Johnson, Nixon, and Clinton the facts had been established and agreed upon by the time Articles of Impeachment were considered. Due to years-long investigations into the allegations against Nixon and Clinton, the only question to answer was what Congress would do to confront the findings.

The evidence uncovered in this impeachment, by contrast, shows the case is not only weak, but dangerously lowers the bar for future impeachment. The record put forth by the Majority is based on inferences built upon presumptions and hearsay. In short, the Majority has failed to make a credible, factually-based allegation against this president that merits impeachment.

By deciding to pursue impeachment first and build a case second, the Majority has created a challenge for itself. In the face of new information that exculpates or exonerates the President, the Majority must choose: either accept that the impeachment inquiry’s findings do not merit impeachment and face the political consequences or, alternatively, ignore those facts. Regrettably, the Majority has chosen the latter.

Politicized impeachment usurps presidential election.

The Majority [in the Congressional Report of the Judiciary Committee on Impeachment] has not only ignored exculpatory evidence but proclaims the facts are "uncontested." The facts are contested, and, in many areas, the Majority's claims are directly contradicted by the evidence. That assertion is further contradicted by the Articles of Impeachment themselves. Not one of the criminal accusations level of the President over the past year--including bribery, extortion, collusion/conspiracy with foreign enemies, or obstruction of justice--has found a place in the Articles. The Majority has not made the case for impeachment in part due to his decision to impeach being rooted less in a concern for the nation that the debasement of the President

History will record the impeachment of President Donald J. Trump as a signal that even the gravest constitutional remedy is not beyond political exploitation. The Articles of Impeachment alone, drafted by the Majority in haste to meet a self-imposed December deadline, underscore the Majority's anemic impeachment case. The Majority's actions are unprecedented, unjustifiable, and will only dilute the significance of the dire recourse that is impeachment. The ramifications for future president so not difficult to surmise. If partisan passions or not restrained, the House of Representatives will be thrown into an endless cycle of impeachment, forgoing its duty to legislate, and usurping the place of the American people in electing their president.