Exerpts from an exchange between South Florida Sun-Sentinel and congressman Robert Wexler:

“The nation does have a few pressing issues pending that could use some attention from our federal lawmakers.

Let’s see. There are a couple of wars going on, unemployment is on the rise as the value of a house continues to fall, millions of Americans have no health insurance, and did we mention that gas prices are expected to hit $5 a gallon? You get the idea. And still, some in Congress feel the nation is just itching for another presidential impeachment.”

“Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Delray Beach, who is smarter than this, supported the Articles of Impeachment [entered by Rep. Dennis Kucinich]…In the case of Bush, Wexler called it a “sworn duty” of Congress to act.

Actually, it’s nobody’s sworn duty to take up any time to go after a badly battered president with only a few months left in office.”

“Nor should Congress bother with the ridiculous idea of impeachment, which Kucinich contends is warranted because Bush deceived the nation into war.”

“There’s plenty of evidence to fuel Kucinich’s ire, but not his choice of remedy. If Congress needs more things than impeachment to keep lawmakers busy, it has myriad options.”

—Sun Sentinel

“No one can deny that if proven these allegations amount to High Crimes. Our failure to act sets an awful precedent and enables future Presidents to break the law and violate our Constitution without sanctions from Congress.

The Sentinel says impeachment is the wrong “remedy” for this litany of crimes. What then is the proper remedy? A harsh lecture? A strongly worded editorial? Or how about doing absolutely nothing in the face of these outrageous abuses of power?

Impeachment hearings need not distract us from other important priorities such as the economy, gas prices and bringing the troops home from Iraq. Congress can and should address all important issues - including safeguarding our constitutional rights and obligations.

—Wexler

The problem with this exchange is that while clearly, Wexler is right and the Sun-Sentinel is wrong, Wexler does not win the argument.

The reason is that the nature and implications of impeachment are not accounted for; Wexler allows Sun to, by implication, treat impeachment as punishment, batting the ambigious term “remedy” back without out adding any clarity.

Impeachment is not punishment, it is merely removal from office. The lateness of the hour only adds to both the urgency and the gravity.

Impeachment is a statement by congress as to the subject’s competence.

There should, as Vincent Bugliosi explains, still be recourse with bush’s second term expired, that is, it should be possible to “Prosecute Bush for Murder”, but that he and his circle know this.

Even if it were feasible, post January 20th,2009, to persue prosecution of bush, he still would have served out his term.

By allowing this, congress, as Wexler points out, sanctions comparable transgressions by bush’s successors and even if Bugliosi’s recommendations were fully implimented, congress’ sanction would still stand.

We would still have had established an unbridled presidency and a congress failing in it’s constitutional duties.

Sun’s claim that Kucinich’s “choice of remedy” is “ridiculous” just exhibits the degree to which cynicism has clouded their preceptions.

Not merely is the “choice” not “ridiculous”, but it is the explicit mandate of both conscience and the constitution.

Unfortunately, only a handful in congress, most notably Kucinich and Wexler, seem to grasp this.

Wexler’s argument would have been much more compelling had he pointed out the simple fact that attention to this issue is not merely one of”…(many) other important priorities such as the economy, gas prices…”.

All these “other important matters”—Sun would add unemployment, falling house values and the lack of health insurance—are hardly constitutionally mandated federal responsiblities.

It would be argued here that these are by nature matters that the federal government should not address to start with and further, that the problems these matters present at their origins were due to federal meddling.

If Wexler would work to keep congress within it’s constitutional mandate, in the manner of his colleague, Dr. Ron Paul, perhaps he could more persuasively argue for it to fulfill one of it’s most basic and essential functions; oversight of the executive branch.

And for that matter, where are congressman Paul and congressman John Conyers, who effectively wrote the book on the impeachment of georgewbush?

—The Bikemessenger