Gallegly Toes Party Line in Panel’s Impeachment Vote

Rep. Elton Gallegly joined a chorus of other Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee on Monday in voting for an impeachment inquiry for President Clinton--the first clear statement the Simi Valley Republican has offered on the divisive debate over the president’s relationship with former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky.

“To arrive at a fair conclusion, based on the evidence, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution” in favor of an inquiry, Gallegly said.

Gallegly made the statement as part of remarks at a Monday meeting of the committee on whether to recommend that Congress begin a formal impeachment inquiry over allegations of perjury and obstruction of justice.

Like other Republicans on the 37-member committee, Gallegly said the serious nature of the charges against the president, whether true or not, justify full scrutiny by Congress.

*

Although the committee voted strictly along party lines Monday, Gallegly said he hoped his colleagues would put aside partisan differences and conduct their inquiry fairly.

“In my 12 years in Congress, this is certainly the most serious issue I have ever had to deal with,” Gallegly said during the committee meeting. “Both Democrats and Republicans must recognize the gravity of the constitutional responsibility that lies before us.

“As we investigate these serious charges, I would appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle not to be dilatory or partisan,” he said. “So far, this whole matter has been a contest of spin, spin, spin and more spin. . . . We should get back to the hard work of analyzing the evidence for the purpose of reaching a just result.”

Gallegly’s stance is common among congressional Republicans, noted Herb Gooch, professor of political science at Cal Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks.

*

“He’s fairly conservative, and I’m sure this is what he personally believes,” Gooch said. All the same, “by and large, he’s done well [by] going along with the party line.”

Congress has few historical precedents to draw upon before deciding President Clinton’s behavior meets the constitutional definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Only twice in the country’s 222-year history has Congress seriously considered impeachment of a president.

Despite calls for an impartial examination of the allegations, the Republican-controlled committee’s handling of the impeachment question has drawn fierce attacks from Democrats.

Some have argued that decisions to release much of independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr’s report and supporting evidence were meant only to further damage the president.

Pointing to national polls that show most Americans oppose impeachment hearings, many Democrats have called for a quick end to the debate.

Some of Gallegly’s constituents echoed those feelings Monday, saying they are tired of watching their elected representatives spend so much time on a matter they believe has little relevance to the country’s day-to-day business.

*

“If this is the most important thing they have to deal with, then their priorities are completely out of whack,” said Pam Halczek of Simi Valley. “I mean, whatever happened to health care and taxes? This is just a big waste of time.”

Moorpark electrician Ted Oglesby said he also considers the Lewinsky scandal unimportant. “It’s a circus,” he said. “But this doesn’t mean anything to me.”

* MAIN STORY: A1