|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
House Democrats kill resolution to impeach Bush
By Patrick Martin
12 June 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Democratic members of the US House of Representatives voted
unanimously to kill an impeachment resolution against President
Bush introduced by Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.
Kucinich himself participated fully in the farce. He introduced
the resolution Monday and read out the 35 articles of impeachment
for crimes ranging from the lying pretexts given to the American
people for the war in Iraq to torture at the US detention camp
in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and illegal domestic spying. Then he moved
to send the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, whose
chairman John Conyers has long rejected any effort to hold Bush
constitutionally accountable. This move will have the effect of
burying the bill indefinitely.
The 251-166 margin of the vote, held on a roll call Wednesday,
saw all 227 Democratsincluding Kucinich and his lone co-sponsor,
Robert Wexler of Floridajoined by 24 Republicans move to
dispose of the resolution. Voting against were 166 Republicans,
who sought to force a debate on impeachment for the purpose of
embarrassing the Democratic Party leadership.
After Kucinich introduced the measure Monday and spent more
than four hours reading the entire text into the Congressional
Record, House Republicans utilized a parliamentary provision to
force the clerk of the House to read the text out loud all over
again on Tuesday, consuming another four hours and keeping the
House in session until after midnight. The purpose was to rub
the Democrats noses in their own refusal to take action
to back up their occasional bursts of anti-Bush demagogy.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ruled out any impeachment of Bush
as soon as the Democrats won control of Congress in November 2006.
Impeachment resolutions against Cheney were introduced in May
and November of 2007 and killed each time by the Democrats, in
the same fashion as the Bush impeachment resolution Wednesday.
There is no question that, unlike Bill Clinton, who was impeached
for lying about a private sexual encounter, George W. Bush is
guilty of offenses that meet the high crimes and misdemeanors
standard set by the US Constitution.
The adamant opposition to impeachment proceedings on the part
of Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and the rest of
the Democratic leadership does not stem from a belief that such
proceedings would be unpopular. According to public opinion polls,
a majority of the American people and an overwhelming majority
of Democratic voters favor Bushs impeachment and removal
from office.
A public vote in the House of Representatives would, however,
find a clear majority of the Democrats in Congress siding with
Bush against the sentiments of their own constituents. The Democratic
leadership seeks to block any vote to conceal as much as possible
their role as the last line of defense for the Bush administration.
The Democratic leadership opposes impeachment not on legal,
but on political and class grounds. They are well aware that the
adoption of an impeachment resolution against Bush and Cheney,
regardless of the outcome of a Senate trial, would deal a major
blow against the White House as an institution and undermine the
legitimacy of all Bushs actions as commander-in-chief,
especially in the war in Iraq.
It would also inevitably raise the question of who in Congress
was complicit with Bushs criminal conduct over the past
seven yearstarring Democrats as well as Republicans, since
a majority of Senate Democrats and a large number of House Democrats
voted for the Iraq war resolution in 2002. Many other actions
listed in Kucinichs articles of impeachment were given near-unanimous
support by the Democrats.
More fundamentally, the Democratic Party is a bourgeois party
and it seeks to uphold the authority of the bourgeois state, the
key political instrument for the defense of the financial aristocracy
that controls American society and both the major
political parties. The Democrats want to replace Bush as chief
executive with one of their own, and their rejection of impeachment
is one more effort to demonstrate to the ruling class that they
will be more responsible in their conduct than their
Republican opponents (who impeached Bill Clinton as he was ordering
bombing raids against the Iraq of Saddam Hussein).
The contrast with the Clinton impeachment is worth exploring,
because it demonstrates the spinelessness and hypocrisy of the
Democratic Party.
The House Republicans voted to impeach Clinton in December
1998, one month after they had lost seats in a congressional election
dominated by the furor over Clintons lying about his sexual
relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Ignoring the clear message
of the election, as well as opinion polls showing popular opposition
to impeachment, the House Republicans utilized their narrow majority
to put the president on trial before the Senate.
The Democrats regained control of the House in November 2006,
in an election dominated by popular hostility to the war in Iraq
and to the Bush presidency. Conyers and other Democrats had demanded
impeachment hearings when they were in the minority and could
not do anything about it. As soon as they became the majority,
they abruptly dropped the issue and declared they would have nothing
to do with it.
Kucinich plays the role of clown prince in these proceedings.
He raised the issue of impeachment of Bush and Cheney both in
the House and in the course of his abortive campaign for the 2008
Democratic presidential nomination, serving as a left
cover for a political party that opposes the war in Iraq only
because it has been a failure, in terms of strengthening the position
of US imperialism in the Middle East and giving the US control
over vital oil supplies.
The Democratic caucus is less and less willing to indulge in
such charades, however. Last November, when Kucinich brought a
similar resolution to the floor against Cheney, he was able to
enlist 22 co-sponsors, while 86 Democratic congressmen and congresswomen
voted to have a debate on the resolution rather than refer it
to committee. This time, Kucinich had only one supporter, Wexler,
and both he and Kucinich himself joined in the unanimous Democratic
vote to bury the measure.
The articles of impeachment introduced Monday are certainly
valid from a legal and constitutional standpoint. Fifteen of the
articles relate to the illegal war in Iraq: lying to the American
people, waging war on the basis of those lies, drawing up secret
plans to seize Iraqs oil reserves, and so on. Five articles
relate to the kidnapping, secret detention and torture of prisoners
by the military and intelligence agencies. Others relate to domestic
abuses of power, including illegal surveillance and wiretapping,
the enactment of secret laws, and obstruction of investigations
into the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
One article relates to ongoing White House plans to engineer
a US war with Iran. Only last month, Conyers sent a letter to
Bush warning him that if you do not obtain the constitutionally
required congressional authorization before launching preemptive
military strikes against Iran or any other nation, impeachment
proceedings should be pursued.
The unanimous rejection of impeachment proceedings by the Democrats
shows that this warning was an empty threat. In the event of a
unilateral or joint US-Israeli military strike against Iranwhich
would be accompanied by a media barrage about alleged Iranian
weapons of mass destruction, support for terrorism
and meddling in IraqCongressional Democrats
will roll over and play dead, just as they have endorsed or permitted
every crime committed by the Bush administration over the past
eight years.
See Also:
The political meaning
of the conflict between Cindy Sheehan and the Democratic Party
[27 July 2007]
Bush administration
domestic spying provokes lawsuits, calls for impeachment
[18 January 2006]
Iraq war lies and impeachment:
Official Washington tiptoes round the i word
[6 August 2003]
Clinton investigations
end, not with a bang, but a whimper
[22 January 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |