PDHblog
This is a place for members of Progressive Democrats of Hawai‘i to express their thoughts
and exasperations about political happenings. The opinions and views are not necessarily
those of PDH's steering committee or membership as a whole.

Dear Rep. Neil Abercrombie,

Our country is in the midst of a Constitutional crisis. Paul Craig Roberts wrote on Counterpunch (July 16, 2007),

Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran.

Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of “executive orders” that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, “terrorist” events in the near future.

As the New York Times lead editorial recognized Sunday, July 22, 2007, the Bush White House is now in complete and open defiance of all lawful Congressional efforts to hold the executive accountable for misconduct and possible crimes committed by members of the White House staff. Just as Bush claimed he had an inherent right to disregard Congressional statutes (e.g., FISA, the Geneva Conventions, signing statements) and the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, or to cover up WH complicity in crimes (via commuting Scooter Libby’s prison term), the President is now claiming he can ignore any Congressional oversight of White House misconduct. Another NYT editorial, “Defying the Imperial Presidency” (July 26, 2007), reminds us that

The administration’s contemptuous attitude toward the constitutional role of Congress was on display again this week when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He repeatedly refused to answer legitimate questions, and he contradicted himself so frequently that it is hard to believe he was even trying to tell the truth. Congress must not capitulate in the White House’s attempt to rob it of its constitutional powers. . . .

The Department of Justice under AG Alberto Gonzales is fully supporting WH complicity in high crimes and misdemeanors, for example through WH interference in the firing of 7 or so State Attorneys General, and other matters. Under questioning by Sen. Whitehouse on July 24, it was revealed that the Office of the Vice President can now pry into any DOJ investigation, which would surely compromise any attempt to investigate high crimes and misdemeanors by the Vice President. It seems likely that Attorney General Gonzales has committed perjury and obstruction of justice, at a minimum. This even has Republicans like Sen. Arlen Spector speculating openly about the need for a Special Counsel.

However, egregious claims like Bush’s can become part of the accepted range of presidential powers if they’re exercised — as Bush’s violations certainly have been — with the full knowledge of Congress, and to this point, unquestioned by them. While impeachment is the correct response here, it needs to be considered that the failure to issue any response at all might end up turning Bush’s extraordinary claims into part of the expected norm of presidential power. Similarly on the issue of contempt, the correct response is inherent contempt and not statutory contempt.

It’s frequently said by some that an impeachment that doesn’t result in a conviction might do the same thing as (or worse) than doing nothing at all, but that’s highly debatable. An impeachment, even when it fails to garner a 2/3 vote to convict in the Senate, is still a pretty clear “questioning” of these exercises. Facing trial before the Senate (and possibly escaping by the skin of one’s teeth) is no small matter*.

As my representative in Congress, you have the responsibility and duty to resist every over-reach of presidential power that clashes with the Constitutional balance of powers that our Nation’s founding fathers wisely established. If you fail to do so, you become, in effect, a collaborator in their imperial designs.

I just checked your website, and I cannot find even the mildest peep of protest against these Constitutional excesses. The imperial pretensions of Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and Rove do not even appear to be an “issue” with you at all. This is hard to understand on any level, especially since you supported a resolution on impeachment in the previous session of Congress.

Your oath of office required by the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States, and as provided by section 2 of the act of May 13, 1884 (23 Stat. 22), to be administered to Members, Resident Commissioner, and Delegates of the House of Representatives, the text of which is carried in 5 U.S.C. 3331:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.

What are you doing to uphold your oath of office in the face of these imperial designs? You told a group of us a few months ago that you would vote for impeachment if it came to the floor of the House, but meanwhile, you appear to be doing nothing to combat these imperial designs. To do nothing is, in effect, to collaborate.

There are now at least 14 co-sponsors of Rep. Kucinich’s resolution of impeachment against VP Richard Cheney. It would be a powerful sign that you do, indeed consider this an important issue if you would join as a co-sponsor of this resolution. Please do so.

Sincerely,

Robert M. Schacht
Honolulu, HI 96826