WASHINGTON, OCT 6: American lawmakers voted on Monday to recommend an open-ended impeachment inquiry against President Clinton starting with the sex, lies and obstruction of justice charges against him.
Meeting in the same cavernous room in which the Watergate hearings were held nearly 25 years ago, the 37-member Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives voted strictly along party lines to proceed with the historic course, revealing in the process deep fissures in the American political landscape.
All 21 Republicans on the committee voted to launch full-blown impeachment proceedings, while all 16 Democrats opposed it and tried to limit the scope and duration of the inquiry.
The recommendation, which came after 11 hours of painstaking deliberations, will now go before the full House later this week where it is again expected to be approved because the Republican hold a majority.
It is only the third time in US history that a President is facing impeachment, a process which will inevitablyresult in his removal from office. If, and after, the House impeaches the President, the matter will move to the Senate. The Senate tries the President with the Chief Justice of the United States presiding. A two-thirds vote of the Senate is needed to remove the President from office.
The atmosphere at 2141 Rayburn House where proceedings began Monday morning was sober, yet electric and partisan. With television cameras trained on them, representatives discoursed at length on the constitutional responsibilities and processes as the sex scandal moved from the frenzied circus atmosphere to the more sedate constitutional aspects.
Few could grasp the import of the moment as the nations politico-legal process stumbled towards removing a President from office on charges of lying and covering up an affair. Is this Watergate or Peyton Place? I don’t know. Republican lawmaker Lindsey Graham mused.
The one high-octane moment of the day came when Robert Wexler, a young Democratic Congressman from Florida ragedagainst the proceedings, saying the country had more important business to attend to.
"The president had an affair. He lied about it. He didn’t want anyone to know about it. Does anyone reasonably believe that this amounts to subversion of government? Does anyone reasonably believe that this is what the founding fathers were talking about?
For more than 200 years since that convention in Philadelphia, Congress has never removed a president from office. Is this where we want to set the bar for future presidents? I plead with this committee to end this nonsense," Wexler bellowed, reflecting the Democratic viewpoint.
But his importunations fell on deaf ears as hard-line Republicans moved swiftly to put Clinton on the mat. They rejected two Democratic resolutions which sought to define a standard for impeachment before beginning an inquiry and a deadline of November 25 to vote for articles of impeachment. Instead, the Republican-majority committee adopted an omnibus resolution that Democrats say willresulting in an unending, expensive witch-hunt.
The Republican resolution calls for an open-ended inquiry that could expand to cover issues other than the Lewinsky matter, like Whitewater, the FBI files controversy or campaign fund-raising abuses, depending on the additional referrals sent to the Congress by Independent Counsel Ken Starr. The formal hearings are likely to begin next month when the House returns after the midterm November 3 elections. Republican leaders have said they hope to complete the process before the new year.
David Schippers, the chief investigator hired by the Republicans, presented 15 potentially impeachable offenses against President Clinton, four more than the 11 cited in Ken Starr’s referral to the Congress. Some charges were repackaged, some dropped and others sub-divided as Republicans tried to make a stronger case against the President than they now have.
The crux of Schippers case centered around the sanctity of the nation’s judicial system and the president’s role asthe nation’s chief law enforcement officer.
The principle that every witness in every case must tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is the foundation of the American system of justice which is the envy of every civilized nation. If lying under oath is tolerated and when exposed, is not visited with immediate and substantial adverse consequences, the integrity of this country’s entire judicial process is fatally compromised and that process will inevitably collapse," Schippers argued.