Washblog

In June of 2006, the Center for Constitutional Rights, based in New York, sent out an intriguing proposal.  Knowing that Democrats nationally were backing away from any attempt to impeach Bush if they won control of both Senate and House, they decided to promote a more grassroots approach, ala Thomas Jefferson.  It turns out that back in the early beginnings of our country, when protection against tyranny was still a fresh concept, Jefferson laid out several different routes for the House of Representatives to bring up impeachment charges on officials that had lost the faith of the people in their leadership.  These routes were contained in Rules of Procedure, an operating manual for the House of Representatives.  Impeachment was dealt with in Rules 602-604.  Rule 603 specifically states: "In the House there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion..." and then lists one of them as, "by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State".

Michael Tivana, an antiwar activist based in Bellevue and former chapter head of the Eastside Fellowship of Reconciliation (EFOR), found out about the campaign, and saw an opening, and a solution.  On July 19th, he persuaded the local chapter of EFOR to approve the campaign.  It wasn't long before he was joined by another Bellevue resident, Linda Boyd.  Linda was essentially a political neophyte, though she had been a generous Democratic Party donor. After seeing the written and video materials from the CCR, she was eager to start.  "I felt so isolated, that I had to do something".  This touched on all the major themes she had been feeling, "abuse of the constitution, lies about the war, all of it." She bought a pile of CDs and DVDs from CCR, and never looked back.  Together, these two set themselves the mammoth task of impeaching the Bush administration, and garnered 20,000 signatures along the way.

Because there is pressure on 501c3 organizations like FOR not to involve themselves in particular political issues, Michael and Linda started a separate organization, called Washington For Impeachment.

Once signature gathering started, they had to find someone who would introduce the impeachment resolution itself.  It wasn't long before they had their first Legislative ally.  First-time candidate Eric Oemig, running as a Democrat in the 45th District, was a former Microsoft engineer, now retired.  His previous civic activity had included starting a progressive public access television show called "Moral Politics."  With a business and civic pedigree like that, he was perfect for the job, running as one of the new crop of Democrats overturning Republican incumbents in the 2006 race - in this case, Toby Nixon. Eric was approached by Michael while still a candidate and asked if he were elected, would he bring a request for impeachment into his first session of Olympia.  He agreed, later commenting on his motivation; "I was motivated fundamentally by a sense of justice. We are supposed to be a nation of laws, and nobody is above those laws, not even the president."

Meanwhile, the two activists were finding out what prior impeachment supporters had already discovered - the road to signature gathering was not an easy one; it ws easy to gather the signatures but more difficult to get our national congress to take heed.  Previous efforts at the national level as early as 2003 had ran aground on broken promises from Democrat "Baghdad Jim" McDermott himself.  This election season, despite the gain of Democratic seats due to disdain for the war, promises had already been made by the national Democratic Party leaders not to pursue impeachment, or as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, "impeachment is off the table."  

Adding to the confusion, the antiwar movement, which should have proved a natural ally of the impeachment movement, was also divided. More moderate activists were hoping that a Democratic Congress would cut off funding for the Iraq war, and with tunnel vision were focused on little else. Other activists were wondering whether impeachment efforts would produce anything more than President Cheney. As the mainstream peace movement flowed with the energy of Lt. Erin Watada, and anyone making a stand against the war in Iraq, impeachment was viewed by some as a side issue or worse, divisive. Meanwhile, more enlightened activists had given up on both parties, and were focused on building efforts to stop Bush from extending and expanding the War On Terror; impeachment fit into their game plan.

By late that fall they had gathered only 8,000 signatures. But then they realized that other impeachment efforts could be used as well.  They gained the agreement of impeachment activists in Olympia, Tacoma, Port Townsend, Bellingham, and prior signature gathering efforts in Seattle, and in effect, "stitched" the signatures together.  Adding these efforts up produced over 18,000 signatures, a number they figured was credible enough for the Legislature to pay attention to.

Pay attention they did.  When the newly minted Senator Oemig looked at the original impeachment language, he embedded much of it in what was called the Washington State Senate Joint Memorial 8016.  Although it didn't contain everything the original impeachment backers had asked for, it's language is clear on the ramifications of what the Bush Administration has done, calling them out as "subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of Washington state and of the United States of America;"  It also directly accused the Bushies of lying about the Iraq war - "The Administration pursued a deceptive strategy of using intelligence reporting that the Intelligence Community had already warned was uncorroborated, unreliable, and in critical instances, fabricated."; "The President, the Vice President, and members of the President's Administration appear to have deliberately misrepresented the severity of the threat from Iraq by providing distorted intelligence to Congress and the public in order to justify war with Iraq;"  

It also went after the Bush Administration for denying civil liberties - "The President has publicly admitted to conducting electronic surveillance of ... millions of American civilians without seeking warrants; The President, the Vice President, and members of the President's Administration have acted to strip American citizens of their constitutional rights..."
Needless to say, it was clear enough to satisfy impeachment advocates.   At an early caucus, he talked about introducing the bill. "I'm new around here and I do feel some pressure" to not pursue a federal issue, Oemig said. "I answer to my constituents who elected me and are asking for me to do this." He displayed what he described as more than 700 e-mails of support, with 11 opposed.  The response was not exactly what he had in mind.  "I was unpleasantly surprised by the widespread opposition" he received from the caucus, he says.  Some Senators told him it was just "too radioactive" an issue to go after.  

After getting nowhere with the caucus, he decided to change the bill to one calling for an investigation, rather than impeachment.  Although advocates were somewhat alarmed, pointing out that such a bill would not fulfill the requirements of rule 604, he ended up with both: an investigation leading to impeach.  To his relief, despite the beating he took in the caucus, he was pleasantly surprised to collect 8 co-sponsors, including traditional Seattle liberal Democrats like Jeanne Kohl Welles, (D-36) and Harriet Spanel (D-46), and the Chair of the Diane Fairley, (D-18).  It is Senator Fairley's Committee, Government Operations, that will give the bill a hearing.

But now the next roadblock is thrown up by the caucus.  It turns out that the only way they will allow the bill to surface in committee is if its hearing is after the date for bills to be advanced out of committee is passed.  Leadership wants one hearing, and then the bill dies, as so many do in Olympia.   Oemig reluctantly agrees, and the hearing is assigned to the Senate's Local Government Committee under Diane Fairley.  In his view, assigning a hearing after the cut-off date is not necessarily the kiss of death.  "Bills get pulled to the floor after dying in committee all the time.  I can't remember the number of times I've seen someone get up and say, `I move the rules be suspended, and bill so-and-so be moved to the floor for a vote.'  That type of parliamentary move is often the bread and butter of the Legislature, though it is not always obvious.

Though grateful for the hearing, impeachment advocates attempted another time-honored strategy to get the bill passed out of committee, by introducing a companion bill.  They have a discussion with Rep. Bob Hasagawa to persuade him to introduce a bill.  He attempts to do so with co-sponsor Marilyn Chase, only to have the same kind of run-in with the House Democratic Caucus that Oemig had in the Senate. Only this time, it is much greater, as the pressure is brought in person from Washington D.C. as party stalwarts Sen. Patty Murray and Sen. Jay Inslee swing into action.  

Senator Murray was at that Democratic Caucus meeting. In a public March 17th Town Hall meeting by Frank Chopp, Speaker of the House from the 43rd, he quoted Murray as saying, "impeachment does not logistically fit into our plans at this time", and the impeachment companion bill in the house died on the spot. Murray then went public and said, "Impeachment? "I've got two words for you: President Cheney."  This statement was then parroted by Gov. Christine Gregoire and other legislators. However, by making this the mantra made the Democrats look like fools because SJM8016 indicts both Bush AND Cheney. Beside Agnew was long gone and replaced by the pardoning Ford long before Nixon stepped down in disgrace. It is obvious that it is not just about impeaching Bush, this is about the victories along the way. Nixon was never impeached, but because of impeachment proceedings he resigned; victory without impeachment.

Meanwhile, Sen. Inslee is sending out emails, castigating Oemig for "grandstanding," and counterpoising ending the war with impeachment; "We should do nothing whatsoever to hinder our effort to end the war. Grandstanding that prevents us from growing a coalition against the war is a luxury we cannot afford."  It was never explained how holding impeachment hearings about the fraud for starting the Iraq war "prevents" the Democrats from building a coalition against the war.   Inslee also states that "all impeachment would do is rally support for George Bush."  Finally, Inslee has at least one face-to-face conversation with Sen. Oemig himself.  Although Sen. Oemig was loath to comment on the particulars, he did admit that Inslee warned him of potential damage to his political career.  

Sen. Inslee even calls Sen. Fairley and asks she cancel the hearing, but sticking to her guns, she tells him the train has already left that station.  Later she states, "There are a lot of folks who can't fly to D.C. to voice their opinions.  There's two sides to this; on the one hand, the good stuff we're doing with health care and education shouldn't be obscured by these things, which are federal items, not state items. But there is a large portion of people who feel they haven't had a forum to say these things. This gives them a way to speak about them."
Others weigh in as well.  Calling Sen. Eric Oemig's bill seeking to impeach President Bush a "distraction" and a "waste of time," Gov. Chris Gregoire joins federal liberal leaders Patty Murray and Jay Inslee in opposition.  State House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, says of Oemig's resolution, "It's unlikely we will do that," and adding, "I have very strong opinions on what a disaster the Iraq war has been, but do I need to say it by passing something on the floor and take up a lot of people's time on that?"

Impeachment advocates push back hard.  A rally is organized for the date of the hearing, drawing almost a thousand people, and several national luminaries of the impeachment movement spoke at both the rally and the overflow hearing, including Salt Lake City Mayor, Rocky Anderson. The hearing room was full, and another room had to have sound piped in to the overflow crowd. This event put the state of Washington on the map and the impeachment movement in this state gained national attention. Washington had become an inspiration for the rest of the country.

Republicans on the Committee boycott the hearing, calling it a "partisan display," which does nothing to dampen the enthusiasm of the dozen or so speakers on the issue, all pro-impeachment, including constitutional expert and professor randy Gordon.  Most witnesses at the state Senate committee hearing on March 1 called Bush and Cheney war criminals, decry the "Bush junta" and warn of American dictatorships to come.  Tivana testified about the mood on the streets. 40% of the 14,000 signatures collected are from apolitical people not involved with either party, plus there are rich and poor, young and old, Christian and Muslims, making impeachment a non partisan remedy for the complaints of US government policies.

Meanwhile Boyd and Tivana are making the rounds of legislative offices, where the word is often that they've received more mail on this issue than any other in recent memory, most of it for the bill.  But Oemig's bill stays right where it is, and though several legislators promise they will vote for the memorial if it comes to the floor, no one in leadership is willing to pull the bill to the floor.  Impeachment advocates then called for another rally on the 19th of April, to coincide with a last ditch attempt to get the Senate to vote on impeachment.

Sen. Oemig goes to the Democratic caucus and tries to get a debate scheduled in the Senate, but the most that the Democratic Senate leadership will yield is to allow Senators to speak on "points of personal preference," a form of oratory where a Senator can make a comment on a matter of personal importance to them.  No debate is allowed, and Senators cannot reply to a point with a counterpoint.  But despite this attempt at decorum, all is not peaceful.  Oemig rose in front of the President of the Senate and asked for a point of personal reference.

He was recognized and the several hundred impeachment supporters in the balconies perked up, expecting a debate to ensue. Nobody had told them there would not be a debate and they know nothing of points of personal reference. Oemig spoke for three minutes and did use the impeachment word as he called for the resignation of President Bush. The people watching the Senate are not allowed to show any emotion or Oemig would have had a round of thunderous applause.

Oemig was followed by (R) Senator Swecker's point of personal reference and he used his 7 minutes (only supposed to speak for three, but the president did not stop him) to wax praise for the troops in Iraq comparing them to our soldiers that fought at Valley Forge. "Their courage is the same now as it was then, they are fighting and giving the supreme sacrifice for our freedom".

Then (D-37th) Senator Kline stood up and asked for a point of personal reference. He spoke against the Iraq war and compared it to the Viet Nam War when he was a student protestor of that wrongful war. And that was it.

That was it?! Then the president of the Senate called upon (D) Senator Tracey Eide, the floor leader, to see if she wanted to adjourn and she said yes, and that was it. Everybody can go home now. WHAT?! The people became incensed and began shouting their feelings onto the floor of the Senate: Impeach! Impeach! was the chant, Do your job!! Defend the constitution! and Shame on you! were also chanted. After 5 minutes of berating the Senate, security managed to file everyone out of the room. Imagine 49 Senators sitting on the Senate floor being commanded by the people to do their jobs. "It felt like democracy where the people hold the power" said Tivana.

One anonymous participant described it as "highly emotional, lots of shouting and even crying."  This show of emotion is an indication of the legislators not listening to the will of the people. Because of Murray and Inslee influenced our state legislators from a federal level, the people feel dictated to from on high. They feel rather than living in a country whose government is of, by and for the people, it appears it is a government of, by, and for Patty Murray.

The Impeachment movement is, at its core, a process of revealing how our government works, while providing a health report for our democracy. The more we learn about the process of decision making the more we realize the decisions are not made by the people unless they make some noise. The new laws ie: the Military Commission Act and the Patriot Acts, and their resulting loss of liberty, demonstrate how much of our constitution has been taken away resulting in a stronger call to repeal them.

The next move for impeachment is to train people to go into their communities and profess the virtues of impeachment. This is occurring around the country through a number of Town Hall forums and it is bringing in a number of resolutions calling for impeachment form city councils, to labor unions.

The mood to remove Bush from office and restore the integrity of the institution of the President of the United States is growing. This emotional tug on the heart of the masses is the key factor in impeaching this administration., we shall see if impeachment or even the threat of impeachment is enough to turn the tide from being a country existing outside the rule of law or a dictatorship to going back to being a constitutional democracy.