Delegation has made some strides
It started with Rep. Jim Himes, who turned from impeachment skeptic into a consistent voice attacking rampant corruption. From his position on the House Intelligence Committee, Himes has used clear, specific language to say exactly what he believes is happening. “The president used official resources for his own personal gain,” Himes said in November.
More recently it’s been Sen. Chris Murphy who has emerged as one of the president’s most outspoken critics, in this case on the killing of an Iranian general.
“The moment we all feared is likely upon us,” Murphy said last week on Twitter. “An unstable president in way over his head, panicking, with all his experienced advisers having quit, and only the sycophantic amateurs remaining . ... A nightmare.”
The effect has been to bring Connecticut’s delegation into an unusual place in the national spotlight. And with their predecessors in office resurfacing in recent weeks, it’s clear again how much better off Connecticut is with Himes and Murphy than the people they replaced.
Murphy, for one, has been building for this moment, with a focus on constructing what he calls a “progressive foreign policy.” His point is a simple one — the issues we care about are not unique to this country and can’t be considered honestly without looking at the bigger picture.
“Our issues don’t exist in a vacuum,” he said in a September speech to the Council of Foreign Relations. “If you care about democracy, or human rights, or the environment here, then you have to care about these fights everywhere.”
Himes’ journey has been different. After initial skepticism about the practical benefits of impeachment, he became the first of the state’s five House members to publicly support the move, even before the Ukraine scandal broke. He has been unstinting in criticizing what is by all appearances rampant self-dealing in the executive branch.
As all this was happening, two former members of the state delegation have spoken out to remind Connecticut of how things used to be.
Himes’ predecessor, former Rep. Chris Shays, was recently seen in these pages saying he would have voted against impeachment because taking that step would be to “overturn” the previous election. Shays wants and deserves credit for resisting his own party’s drive to impeach Bill Clinton in the 1990s, but the similarities to today aren’t as clear as he seems to think they are. And his basic premise is nonsense.
If the president were to be removed from office by the Senate, taking his place would be Mike Pence, not Hillary
Clinton. Nothing about the 2016 election would be overturned. Lawmakers should take impeachment seriously, but the process is in the Constitution, and there’s nothing illegitimate about it.
As for Murphy’s predecessor, Joe Lieberman recently made an appearance on Fox News (of course) arguing that “fellow Democrats” should be more supportive of the president’s actions in the Middle East. But Lieberman doesn’t have a party. Democrats rejected him in the 2006 Senate primary, and he won that year as the de-facto Republican. Once those unique circumstances passed, Lieberman’s political home disappeared, which as much as anything explained his decision not to run again in 2012.
Shays and Lieberman were longtime favorites of political observers who think anything centrist is by its nature preferable. Not coincidentally, they were leading proponents of launching a war in Iraq, which was a terrible idea then that only looks worse now.
There’s nothing centrist about blindness to wrongdoing, and there’s nothing admirable about looking the other way. It’s fine to be partisan if you have the truth on your side. We should be glad to have representatives in Congress who understand that.
Hugh Bailey is editorial page editor of the Connecticut Post and New Haven Register. He can be reached at hbailey@ hearstmediact.com.