Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 7 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Cynicism and Generosity to Congress

By       (Page 1 of 2 pages)   No comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message David Swanson
Become a Fan
  (141 fans)

By David Swanson

In May of 2005 the Downing Street Memos came out, and some of us started a website and coalition called After Downing Street.  And for many months we worked closely with Congressman John Conyers and many other Democrats in Congress, holding unofficial hearings, trying to pass resolutions of inquiry, and educating the public about impeachable offenses.  But for the past year or so, including the past six months of Democratic majority, Congress Members have been much less interested in this project.

The most cynical interpretation of this, I think, is that Congress Members care about nothing other than elections.  Prior to the 2006 elections, they feigned interest in impeachment because they thought it would help them.  Now, during the two-year-long prelude to the 2008 elections, they are avoiding impeachment because they think that keeping Bush, Cheney, and the war around is the way to win, to each win individually and to win the strongest possible majority.

How many of you think that's what they're thinking and doing?  (In Chicago 2/3 of the room raised their hands on June 21.)

The most generous possible interpretation, on the other hand, I think, is that the Democrats are waiting for the right moment, pushing investigations both publicly and in secret to help build the case, and quietly organizing to make sure an impeachment succeeds.  And, in case it doesn't, they're working at the same time to accomplish (either in this session or the next one) the reversal of Bush and Cheney policies through legislation.  So, even if they don't hold Bush and Cheney accountable for their abuses, the Democrats hope to ban those abuses in the future.

How many people think that's what's going on?  (In Chicago one guy in the whole hall raised his hand.)

Now, here's a third interpretation.  There is some truth to both of the others, but they are too simplistic.  Each member of Congress is a human being, capable of conflicting goals, self-deception, uncertainty, and shifting priorities.  And each Congress Member is different from the others.  They are herd animals.  But it is possible to predict who will break from the herd first and why.  In the lead-up to the 2006 elections, the Democrats avoided impeachment at the insistence of Nancy Pelosi.  It was in 2005 with no election looming that they pushed toward it.  Of course, the public believed a Democratic majority would mean impeachment, and some Democrats who campaigned on impeachment or accountability did very well.  There was never any evidence to support the strategy of avoiding impeachment, but my point is that Pelosi adopted that policy in May 2006, well before the elections.  And there are some Democrats who recognize that impeachment is the surest way to win in 2008.  And there are others who put saving human lives at least on an equal level with winning in 2008.  Others favor impeachment but are afraid to challenge Pelosi or afraid to move on anything controversial until a lot of others move first.  There are some in prominent positions afraid to move until someone even higher up gives the OK or until a whole lot of those lower down demand it.  And of course a lot of those lower down are afraid to act until someone leads them.

How many of you think this is what is happening in Washington?  (In Chicago, ¾ of the room raised their hands.)

If this is right, then we have to conclude that if impeachment is going to happen, and if there is anything we can do to make it happen, we should look to BOTH the threat of electoral defeat as one of the necessary tools to appeal to concerns of certain Congress Members outside of their obsession with elections. 

Exhibit #1 in the case for electoral pressure is Albert Wynn.  This Congressman from Maryland is perhaps the least likely member of the Black Caucus to support impeachment.  He's one of the reasons that on many issues the Black Caucus can't achieve a unified progressive position anymore.  But a young woman named Donna Edwards came very close to defeating Wynn in the last primary and is challenging him again.  Wynn never signed onto H Res 635, Conyers' bill for a preliminary investigation, but he was one of the first to sign onto H Res 333 to impeach Dick Cheney.  At you can help us recruit challengers in other primaries.

Exhibit #1 in the case for appealing to Congress Members' consciences and willingness to challenge their colleagues even when their own seats are not at stake is Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky.  She was one of the first to sign onto both H Res 635 and H Res 333.  Jan Schakowsky stands for the rule of law, and she deserves our gratitude.  But we need to place an even greater burden on her shoulders.  She is one of only 435 people with the power to act.  We need to ask her to do more than just sign onto a bill.  We need her to lobby her colleagues publicly and privately to join her.  If she understands the gravity of the situation, that's the least she can do.  After all, thousands of other Americans are working night and day, sacrificing their family lives, even going to jail, even marching from Chicago to Washington for this cause.

But the other Illinois Congress Members who have not signed onto H Res 333 stand not for the rule of law, but for tyranny and the rule of Dick Cheney.  And pundits in Washington can't figure out why the only thing less popular than Bush, other than Cheney, is the Congress.  A Gallup poll says that those with confidence in how Congress is acting are 14 percent of Americans.  So, we should run challengers in primaries, but also lobby, pressure, annoy, educate, sit-in, and shame Illinois Congress Members who are not Jan Schakowsky.

I got an Email this morning from Congressman Henry Waxman's office.  He's been looking into Dick Cheney's attempts to exempt the Vice President's office from requirements to protect classified information.  Cheney couldn't get the office at the National Archives to go along, so he proposed eliminating it.  At one point he argued that the office of the Vice President is not part of the executive branch.

That's a start.  Most of us would prefer Cheney were not part of our country at all.

We want to restore the offices of the vice presidency and the presidency to the rule of law, to the state in which the next administration and future ones, including more dangerous ones than this one, will understand that they cannot get away with spying without warrants, detaining without charges, torturing, lying us into wars of aggression, committing countless war crimes, hiding our government behind a wall of secrecy, exacting retribution against whistleblowers, rewriting laws passed by Congress, and refusing to comply with Congressional subpoenas.

Not to mention stealing elections, politicizing the Department of Justice, ignoring threats to cities like New York and New Orleans, misappropriating funds, manufacturing phony news reports, bribing journalists, bombing journalists, and generally behaving like the mafia with bigger weapons. 

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

David Swanson Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

David Swanson is the author of "When the World Outlawed War," "War Is A Lie" and "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union." He blogs at and and works for the online (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Obama's Open Forum Opens Possibilities

Public Forum Planned on Vermont Proposal to Arrest Bush and Cheney

Feith Dares Obama to Enforce the Law

Did Bush Sr. Kill Kennedy and Frame Nixon?

Can You Hold These 12 Guns? Don't Shoot Any Palestinians. Wink. Wink.

Eleven Excellent Reasons Not to Join the Military

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend