The disturbing new frequency of impeachment
Impeachment was once considered a rare constitutional curiosity. A few judges had been impeached by the US House of Representatives, but only one president, Andrew Johnson, in 1868. He was acquitted by trial in the Senate by one vote less than the constitutional two-thirds required for conviction and removal from office.
Johnson was impeached 80 years after the Constitution was adopted, across which time span none of his 16 predecessors were impeached. This was followed by 106 years, during which none of Johnson’s next 19 successors were impeached. This totaled one impeachment among the first 36 presidents, over the first 186 years of the republic. Rare indeed!
When Richard Nixon, the country’s 37th president, faced impeachment in 1974, an audio tape was found proving his obstruction of justice. In it, Nixon directed his aides to have the CIA falsely mislead the FBI that the illegal break-in at Democratic Party offices was part of a national security operation, and off-limits to FBI scrutiny.
Without any prior sworn evidence of presidential involvement in the crime, suddenly there was irrefutable evidence of his guilt. Republican supporters in the House (myself included) immediately abandoned him because of this “smoking gun.” Nixon resigned rather than await a bipartisan vote in the House and trial in the Senate.
America did not have to wait another hundred years for the third impeachment process. Following just 24 years of restraint, with four presidents spared similar charges, President Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998 by a bipartisan vote of the House. The Senate did not convict and remove him, lacking a two-thirds vote for conviction.
Today, 19 years post-Clinton, with two intervening presidents (against both of whom impeachment resolutions were introduced but dismissed in committee) we are treated once again to this blood-sport of partisan politics. That’s three impeachment actions among nine presidents in 45 years. Two of the last four!
President Donald Trump now faces an expected party-line vote of impeachment on the House floor. It is beyond dispute that House majority Democrats have a right to bring articles of impeachment, which they consider an obligation. Many Americans suspect that President Trump did what he is accused of doing with the President of Ukraine. The congressional debate is whether it is sufficient to remove a president without direct witness testimony to a crime. This became more difficult when President Trump directed his administration not to participate without due process of a court order.
Democrats and Republicans are locked in opposition. From what we know at this time, Trump will probably not be removed from office by the Senate — with party-line votes in both chambers.
Will each side then condemn the other, and claim “victory”? Will both sides look for political advantage and the next opportunity for vengeance? With Congress conditioned to impeach somebody with increasing frequency, it seems that all it requires now is to elect a president from one political party, while the opposing party controls the House. It only takes a few well-placed holdovers from previous administrations, armed with today’s high-tech spying technology, and a barrage of leaks and anonymous sources. Could many presidential heroes from the past have survived today’s methods?
This is not about the guilt or innocence of the current or previous incumbents. It’s about today’s irreconcilable polarization, and a warning for future presidents. In recent decades, impeaching presidents has become almost commonplace. Consider that of the four presidents charged, two were spread over the first 200 years, and two in the 20 years. That should raise a few concerns to consider:
Have partisan battle lines over impeachment become the new normal?
Would we accept impeachment of every president serving with a House majority of the other party?
Are we comfortable that impeachment by the House never results in conviction and removal by the Senate?
Does this tend to trivialize impeachment?
Are we okay with that?