What price should Hoekstra pay for Constitution-shredding tax vote?

Our U.S. Constitution is under attack from within after the U.S. House cast a resounding 328 yes vote to punish AIG executives after the fact for retention and other bonuses they received while being bailed out with federal tax dollars. Slapping a confiscatory tax on the bonuses allowed a majority of members of Congress to make populist points and feign outrage.

More seriously, the effort to reclaim the money, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, appeared to be in direct contravention of our most sacred document, the Constitution, by imposing a tax retroactively and only on a tiny, specific sector of private citizens.

The first Article -- Section 9 -- of the Constitution prohibits Congress from passing a "Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law," which is what Pelosi's AIG tax punishment would have done.

It should surprise no one that Pelosi, who recently declared illegal aliens to be patriots, would strong-arm fellow Democrats for support.

More surprising is that 85 Republicans would lock arms with her in approving the bill, including noted conservative U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland.

"I thought it was shameful for the Congress to be voting on these things because they were purely political votes," Hoekstra told me.

Hoekstra said half the people in his district appear to be fine with his reluctant vote, but the other half are furious with him.

"The half that are furious with me are my friends," said Hoekstra, the possible gubernatorial candidate. "I, maybe, did the wrong thing."

The congressman explained that a vote against taxing the AIG bonuses would have been used against him in future political races, while a vote in favor of the tax may not be constitutional but has no chance of advancing through the Senate and on to President Barack Obama.

Hoekstra's "Catch-22" plight will become evident if he follows through on his expected announcement Monday to run for governor.

He'll certainly be challenged -- if not in the GOP primary, then certainly in a general election (if he gets that far), for voting in favor of a clearly unconstitutional bit of legislation.

"I'm not going to ... defend that vote and say ... that was the right thing to do," Hoekstra said. "...I didn't like being there -- Pelosi put me there. Chalk one up to her political skills."

While it's difficult to sympathize with elected officials in either party who bow to political pressure, it's important -- and a bit disconcerting -- to consider that 328 of them found it acceptable to ignore the document on which our nation was founded.

Hoekstra may pay a price on the issue. If he does, none of the other willing Constitution shredders should be exempt from the same fate the next time they run for election.

Frank Beckmann is host of "The Frank Beckmann Show" on WJR (760 AM) from 9 a.m.-noon Monday-Friday. His column appears on Friday. E-mail comments to letters@detnews.com">letters@detnews.com.