. . . But an Enduring Source of Valuable Lessons

Like many Americans, I have mixed emotions regarding the end of President Clinton’s impeachment trial.

On one level, I join nearly every American by saying that I am glad it is over. Politically, emotionally and from a policy sense, few sides came out of this ordeal intact. In my opinion, the sooner this matter was completed, the sooner the government could get back to the people’s work.

On the other hand, one can only look back at this entire matter and be amazed at what has occurred. When this whole ordeal broke, there was an outcry from many of my constituents who said that if the president committed perjury before a federal grand jury, then he should be removed from office.

Since August, the attitude of the public has changed. Although nearly every American agrees that the president did commit perjury, did commit obstruction of justice and is of a very low moral character, they do not want him removed from office.

What amazes me is that the impeachment debate obscured a record that was very impressive. The Republican-led 105th Congress had achieved a wonderful legislative record of cutting taxes, providing the first balanced budget in a generation and real work in saving Medicare. Equally, the president had developed a positive record in working with Congress by assisting in passage of welfare reform and signing the balanced budget act. All that disappeared with the impeachment debate and the subsequent fervor surrounding it.

However, the ending of this trial leaves me with a very empty feeling. Not that the House managers were unsuccessful in persuading the Senate to convict the president, or that the public at large disagrees with my vote on this matter; rather, the empty feeling is due to the fact that this debate was not about the larger issues involved.

The president’s actions were intolerable and improper. Few would disagree with that opinion. However, this debate, which should have been about perjury, obstruction of justice and its relevance to the Constitution, became one of polls, fairness and whether Kenneth Starr was a good or bad man.

Let me make one point absolutely clear: I have deep respect for those who sincerely believe that the charges against the president do not rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. Although I disagree, I do respect their position. Unfortunately, the debate rarely, if ever, came down to this issue.

When the House began its deliberations in the Judiciary Committee, the president’s defense team blamed Starr for the president’s problems. When the committee offered the president the opportunity to clear his name through questions and defense time, the president’s team presented no facts to disprove the evidence by Starr. Aside from arguing that Starr was out to get the president, his attorneys argued that a felony was never committed, contrary to what most American’s believe. Therefore, the level of crime to impeachment was never addressed. Instead, the president’s alles chose to attack the messenger rather than the message.

In the Senate trial, it was much the same. The president’s defense was that the charges were a result of a political witch hunt by the Republicans, a result of an unfair, politically motivated civil case. To the dismay of many, his defense also focused on legal hairsplitting, based on his subjective meaning of words such as “is” and “alone.”

My concern now is about the future. I felt that the crimes the president was charged with rose to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. As such, I voted for the articles of impeachment. Some say I, along with many of my colleagues, was wrong in this vote. I’m not a lawyer or a constitutional expert. I’m a husband, father, grandfather, businessman and member of Congress who believes that when a person intentionally lies before a grand jury and tries to obstruct our judicial system, he or she is not worthy to serve as president of the United States.

I hope future presidents will learn a valuable lesson from this impeachment trial. I hope they will make better decisions than President Clinton did and be more accountable for their actions when choosing the wrong path.

And if they don’t, we at least can be assured that we have a Constitution in place, written by our Founding Fathers, that will continue to endure the flaws of men and women throughout time.