USA TODAY International Edition
Our view: Speaker Pelosi, time to hold a full House vote
Let’s be clear, if the House of Representatives wants to launch an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s conduct, it need not hold a vote. The White House argument that failing to do so somehow violates the Constitution is entirely made up.
The document says nothing of the sort. It succinctly gives the House “sole power of impeachment,” allowing it to “determine the rules.” So when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last month simply announced the start of a formal impeachment inquiry, she was doing what’s allowed. But that isn’t the same as doing what’s right. She needs to call for a vote on launching an inquiry — sooner rather than later.
The House has few responsibilities more grave than drawing up articles of impeachment for removing a president — in this case, for abusing powers of his office to pressure a foreign government to dig up dirt on a political opponent.
Americans should know where their elected representatives stand on launching an inquiry. This isn’t an impeachment vote. And it isn’t a mystery whether it would pass.
Already, 227 Democrats and one independent have expressed support for the idea. It only takes 218 to pass.
Presumably, Pelosi wants to spare Democrats in swing districts from going on the record over such a politically divisive issue. But Americans are tired of this inside- the- Beltway politics; it’s a key reason so many abandoned traditional presidential candidates in 2016.
Moreover, such a vote would give the House investigation a stronger hand in court for obtaining White House documents and testimony.
A federal judge said as much last week in a hearing on a House demand for grand jury material. “Wouldn’t it make your request ... a lot easier if the House would have taken a vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry? Easier for all of us?” Chief U. S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell asked.
A vote would also be the historically fair thing to do given that in each of three previous efforts to impeach a president — Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton — the House passed resolutions to gather facts.
There is also precedent for allowing some semblance of due process during impeachment proceedings, although it would do well for the public to remember that impeachment is akin to a grand jury process. If and when articles are drawn up and approved by the House, Trump would be entitled to such full due process rights as cross- examination of witnesses and presentation of defense evidence during a subsequent trial in the Senate.
There should be no illusion that by taking this vote, a White House bent on stonewalling will suddenly cooperate. That’s unlikely short of a court order. And given Republicans’ propensity for acting in lockstep out of fear of Trump’s Twitter rage, a vote may well fall along partisan lines ( although that’s not certain), and allow the White House an argument that the effort is biased.
Even so, there’s a growing momentum — strengthening over days, if not hours — for the government’s system of checks and balances to examine Trump’s actions in the context of impeachment. Polling shows a majority of Americans now favor an inquiry.
Pelosi should allow the House to join this groundswell, and vote.