House Democrats are inexorably heading for bringing formal articles of impeachment against President Trump. Had roles been reversed — a Democratic president committing these same transgressions, with the House controlled by Republicans — the Democratic president surely would have been impeached, and likely convicted, by now. But whether it is federal budget deficits, foreign policy errors, or seeking foreign assistance in elections, Republicans can get away with actions for which Democrats would be excoriated.
Early in Trump’s presidential reign, a few — very few — Democrats were urging impeachment. With no serious threat, Trump boasted that he would welcome it. Even though the Mueller Report clearly cited obstruction of justice, the Report did nothing of practical political consequence to move Democrats or the public toward impeachment. The chief practical consequence of the Report was to embolden Trump to push his power to new levels.
Recent events surrounding the Ukrainian imbroglio have changed all that. With Trump clearly having asked a foreign power to smear a political opponent, and credible witnesses avoiding Trump’s “orders” not to testify, Democrats have been emboldened. As the odds of impeachment have increased dramatically, Trump’s demeanor has changed dramatically, from “welcoming it,” to near panic. He clearly fears joining his nemesis, Bill Clinton, as the second modern era president to bear the scar of impeachment.
Prior to the Ukrainian imbroglio, there were clear political risks for Democrats to go the impeachment route. While these risks were arguably exaggerated, it’s clear that the risk situation has changed. Political risks remain, but not just for Democrats; there are definite risks for Republicans as well.
The clear political risk for Democrats early on was that as long as the majority of voters opposed impeachment, it would be seen as overreach, an attempt to overturn the election of 2016. A few Democrats argued that obstruction of justice, using the presidency for financial enrichment, and other presidential transgressions were sufficient, and should be brought against the president regardless of political risks. That was definitely a minority view.
Perhaps it was because the Ukrainian deal seeking foreign help to smear Trump’s political opponent was current and in plain sight, or seen as simply too egregious. Public support for impeachment increased — though not to an overwhelming majority. Much of the nation is still opposed, or ambivalent to impeachment and removal. Political risks for Democrats still exist for the impeachment route.
However, just as Democrats face risks for impeachment, there are political risks for Democrats not to impeach. By not impeaching, Democrats will be seen as implicitly tolerating obstruction of justice, approving using the presidency for financial enrichment, tolerating foreign assistance to smear political enemies, and all the rest of it. Moreover, Democrats would be seen as continuing to be weak and indecisive, all talk and no action.
Critics insist that impeachment will serve only to stiffen Trump’s solid base. But does anyone really believe that if Democrats lay off on impeachment that his base will soften?
When weighing the risks, Democrats have more to lose by not impeaching, rather than making the strong case for impeachment and moving decisively ahead.
While the media pundits have been fixated on risks for Democrats, a few of them are finally noting the risks for Republicans.
There are those Republican politicians who think Trump is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and will obsequiously obey his every command. Trump owns them.
Other Republican lawmakers know that Trump is committing egregious acts that never would be tolerated if committed by a Democrat, and probably don’t really like the guy. But they are spineless, scared stiff of him. Consequently, while reacting with furrowed brow, they labor to put the best spin on Trump’s acts. Unable to deny Trump’s transgressions, they laboriously argue that they “don’t reach the level of impeachment,” and whine about “the process.”
Republicans who don’t totally and enthusiastically sing his praises face Trump’s wrath. A few Republicans appear to be weary of interpreting and spinning Trump’s rhetoric and actions. But they dare not oppose Trump for fear of being targeted with vicious tweets, and opposition from Trump supporters at home. Trump has already labeled insufficiently enthusiastic Republicans as “scum, worse than Democrats.”
While Republican politicians may escape Trump’s wrath by supporting him, that support carries other risks. Even though not an overwhelming majority, the public trend is toward impeachment. Politicians who support Trump must explain endorsing Trump’s multiple transgressions and unpresidential behavior.
When the House imposes formal articles of impeachment, the Senate will act as jury. With their votes, they will be first be judged by their constituents. Politicians place short run considerations—the next election—over long run considerations. But in the long run, they will all face the verdict rendered by history.
A small handful of Republicans are voicing clear objections to Trump’s behavior. So far, that category is limited to those Republicans who are retired — John Kasich, for example — those planning to retire, or those in safe seats like Utah’s Senator Romney, who can essentially hold that seat forever if he so chooses.
Romney’s explicit criticism of Trump has been met with a Trump tirade that serves as stern warning to other Republican senators. Even considering Romney’s reticence, his future vote to support Trump is possible, even likely. And considering Romney’s safe seat, he is no candidate for a “profile in courage” award.
Then we have pliable Republicans up for reelection like Maine’s Senator Susan Collins, the reliable conservative who has long convinced the media nitwits that she is a “moderate.” She’s no moderate, and is in trouble. She will go whichever way the wind is blowing at the time.
There are plenty of political risks for both parties, and we can’t predict the future. But for now, it looks as if the House will bring impeachment proceedings to the Senate. Barring unforeseen incidents, the Senate will acquit, with few, if any, Republican Senators daring to convict.
— John Waelti of Monroe, a retired professor of economics, can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.
