In the examples you cite there are legal protections, appeal rights, laws and other checks and balances. Having congress become a police force even to inforce laws is a mistake because motives are purely political not legal.
The last thing conservatives should want is to get on bandwagon to set precedent for federal government to assume more control and more enforcement ability. Don’t forget that congress is the IRS. They control the purse, the laws and have oversight. Let’s not give congress a reason to expand their reach by pretending they are separate from the IRS.
Congress’ authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt is well established and confirmed by the Supreme Court.
The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.”
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html
73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934)
https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement
http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
Instead all the enforcement powers - to force the GOVERNMENT to be accountable - is to be concentrated in one Attorney General?
Exactly what is the check on the executive, in that scenario? He appoints the top cop who does legal CYA for all the crimes his regime commits, and everybody else has to sit there and take it? The executive sends people to Congressional investigations and p!sses all over the truth and all over we the people’s representatives and then laughs all the way to the bank, and nobody can do a dang thing?
That is a recipe for revolution, right there. It’s exactly what got us the first revolution.
This is a very specific, narrow resolution to force the Speaker to do what he is Constitutionally allowed to do - to enforce CONGRESS’ subpoenas. If one of us little people lied to Congress we’d be nailed. Would you be against that?