© 2024 KRWG
News that Matters.
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

The Great Debate Over Impeachment

 

 Commentary: Impeachment loomed over political news this week as the Trump administration fought efforts by the Democratic-led House of Representatives to conduct oversight.

Any decision about impeachment must be to contain harm from criminality or incapacity. Additionally, removing a president from office permits prosecution (unless they get pardoned), allowing the republic to move on while a former president faces legal consequences.

Historically, impeachment has not worked out that way. Impeachment talk is easy; winning conviction by a two-thirds Senate majority is difficult.

As of the second week of May, comparison of opinion polls implies scant enthusiasmamong the general public for impeaching President Donald Trump. Does that matter?

While some Democrats, including presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, have issued calls for impeachment proceedings, the House Democratic leadership has been hosing down such talk in favor of more hearings, more fact-finding, and seeking to defeat Trump in the 2020 election.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s cautionis unapologetically strategic and centrist. For those who view impeachment as the only way to intervene against a maligned presidency, that may seem an infuriating refusal to take action, a sacrifice of principle for partisan advantage. On the other hand, Pelosi can point to opinion polls in her defense.

One could argue that presidents have been impeached for “high crimes and misdemeanors” less brazen than what Trump has done.

After all, one of the 11 articles of impeachment against President Andrew Johnson in 1868 was exposing the presidency to “contempt, ridicule and disgrace, to the great scandal of all good citizens.” Johnson was also impeached for political rhetoric questioning the legitimacy of Congress.

Small beer, one could say, compared to Trump’s rallies, but political rhetoric in the Americas was never so innocent.

While I would argue we are too hesitant to hold federal officers to account for criminal acts, especially presidents (who tend to be loved like kings by their supporters), impeachment is not a reliable tool even when a president clearly needs to be removed from office. Impeachment is neither swift nor necessarily just.

Johnson was nominally put on trial for removing a cabinet officer against the wishes of Congress, but the background was a political fight over the fate of freedmen, citizenship rights for black people and capitalism.

Was Johnson’s impeachment a legitimate defense of the separation of powers, or was it a political cudgel? Anyway, he was acquitted, albeit narrowly, amid accusations of bribes and partisan chicanery.

President Richard Nixon presents the next example in 1974. This is as close as we came to a paradigmatic “good” impeachment although it did not come to that. Besides committing crimes and obstructing justice, there was a credible concern of ongoing harm.

Once articles of impeachment passed the House Judiciary Committee, Nixon quit rather than face trial. Thus, the president was removed without putting the republic through that ordeal. Unfortunately, Nixon was spared legal accountability once Gerald Ford became president andpardoned him.

The third example, and our freshest memory of impeachment, was that of President Bill Clinton 20 years ago. Clinton was impeached for violating the law when he lied to a grand jury about something tawdry and for obstructing justice, but it did not fulfill a test of ongoing harm and the effort was viewed as opportunistic, for which Republicans paid a price after Clinton was acquitted.

Wherever the Congressional inquiries lead, it might be worth amplifying a recent suggestion by USA Today columnist Chris Truax to find positive ways to vindicate principles, as by celebrating those who resist despotism and defend republican institutions.

We might extend that effort to all striving to empower and educate ordinary citizens for political participation.