Wednesday, January 13, 1999
Partisan politics threaten integrity of U.S. institutions
CONGRESS: Party lines must not supersede Senate’s obligation to
administer fair trial
Unfulfilled promises of impartial, nonpartisan efforts reflect a
failed impeachment process in the House of Representatives, setting
a dangerous precedent for the future of the union. The words and
spirit of the Constitution have been undermined by the House’s
impeachment proceedings, which has evolved into a partisan
political circus.
In order for the Senate to restore any degree of integrity to
the presidency, Congress and impeachment process, their votes must
reflect a decision based on the oath they swore to uphold:
"Impartial justice according the Constitution and laws" must
prevail over partisan bickering.
Article IV, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution defines an
impeachable offense as "treason, bribery or other high crimes and
misdemeanors." According to the 1974 House Judiciary Committee
Impeachment Report, "impeachment is intended to remove from
executive power one who commits acts of grave misconduct that so
injures or abuses our constitutional institutions and form of
government as to justify impeachment."
The House passed impeachment articles accusing Clinton of
perjury before a federal grand jury and obstruction of justice in
an attempt to conceal an extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky.
Nearly every representative voted according to party affiliation –
Democrats opposing the two articles of impeachment and Republicans
voting in favor of it. Only five Democrats backed the two
articles.
If Clinton’s "offenses" were such clear-cut, impeachable high
crimes, the votes to impeach him would have transcended party
lines. The House vote did not reflect this, even though lead
prosecutor and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde
(R-Ill.) said that the impeachment process should not continue
unless both parties supported the charges.
Though political ideologies traditionally separate parties –
Republicans tend to be more critical of the personal lives of their
leaders and Democrats more tolerant – an impeachable offense should
be one that is so heinous that it reaches beyond party
ideologies.
The Senate appears to recognize the seriousness of its duties,
as well as the House’s lack of bipartisan efforts in the
impeachment hearings. Senate majority leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.)
ensured that the proceedings will be in the "very best tradition of
the Senate." The Senate is following through with its promises for
now and has agreed on the basic outline for trial proceedings, but
party politics may dominate yet again. The debate on whether or not
to call witnesses looms ahead and will be the first of many tests
for their many, nonpartisan promises.
The bipartisan spirit, though it might presently be based upon a
mutual decision to buy some time, must prevail throughout the trial
if the proceedings are to be taken seriously. Senators were sworn
in as jurors, promising to "do impartial justice according to the
Constitution and laws." It is now up to them to follow through with
their words.
Since President Clinton is only the second president in the
history of our nation to have been impeached by the House, the
seriousness and extremely rare incidence of impeachment should not
be forgotten. Impeachment is a measure intended for one purpose –
to protect the state. Representatives who used the impeachment
hearings as yet another way to criticize and embarrass the
president frivolously disregarded the intentions behind this
process.
The future of the presidency and the impeachment process lies
heavily on how the Senate chooses to carry out the trial; it can do
it like the House, with petty politics, or re-establish some sense
of dignity to an institution that needs it.
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]