Yesterday’s vote by the U.S. House of Representatives to impeach President Donald Trump places Dec. 18 on a short list of solemn days in American government, and like most occasions of this magnitude, its true impact won’t be felt until years, perhaps decades, from now.
Regardless of the merits of the charges against the president, Americans should be concerned that Wednesday’s vote garnered no bipartisan support. The nation should guard against the possibility that impeachment, with its divisiveness and accusations, becomes a regular part the political process in Washington. That power is too great to be reduced to a mere political tool.
We note with concern that the House has passed articles of impeachment three times now in the past 45 years, having done so only once in the previous 185 years.
Most presidents, of course, have detractors in Congress willing to take up that sword. Even the venerable George Washington faced rumblings of impeachment over policy decisions. A half century later, John Tyler became the first president to have an official impeachment petition filed against him.
More recently, members of Congress filed unsuccessful impeachment resolutions against Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and Barack Obama.
And in 2008, a House member brought 35 articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush. The House voted to send the process to the Judiciary Committee, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi applied the brakes, saying impeachment was “off the table.”
Now, she has led her chamber to the conclusion of its grave constitutional responsibility, issuing the ultimate rebuke of a U.S. president. Such a move is necessary for inappropriate behavior, and as we have said previously, the Constitution gives room for impeachment even for acts not considered criminal under U.S. law.
Still, voting on articles of impeachment isn’t the only way to reprimand a sitting official, and we’re unsure congressional leaders — those who led the charge and the members from both sides who have mocked, belittled or vilified their opponents — are clear-eyed about the effects their actions can have.
The nasty debates surrounding impeachment, as well as the details of alleged wrongdoing, affect the culture and taint Americans’ trust in vital institutions. The evidence for such isn’t hard to find. The media coverage of President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial, however warranted, injected salacious speech into the average American home, producing a coarsening effect on everyday attitudes and behaviors that has hardly diminished.
Even within the few short years of the Trump presidency, surveys have detected a downward shift in the trust Americans have for their government institutions, and an alarming share of the public says the quality of political discourse has become less respectful, fact-based and substantive.
The lesson here is what happens in Washington elevates or cripples national morality. Wednesday’s actions and the forthcoming Senate trial are no exception.
The prudent next step would be for the Senate to conduct an honest and fair trial, one that could dwell on truth and quell the political maelstrom. The recent assertion by Sen. Lindsey Graham that he is “not trying to pretend to be a fair juror,” leaves us little hope for such an outcome.
But that doesn’t mean voters must engage in the brawl. A veritable army of informed, respectful and warm-hearted citizens can ward off threats to American virtues, while still engaging in the democratic process. Their job, and ours, in the coming months should be to confront bile and replace it with light and truth. “Do unto others,” as the saying goes, and Americans have a chance at reclaiming the principles on which a functioning republic must stand.