The Next Slow, Unsteady Step

A couple of weeks ago, when a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee voted to pursue contempt of Congress against Harriet Meirs, Judiciary Chairman John Conyers asked, "Are congressional subpoenas to be honored, or are they optional?" I replied that it looked like we'd soon find out. Well, perhaps "soon" was a bit overoptimistic. The full Judiciary Committee didn't hold its vote until today, and it was another party-line affair 22-17. Apparently the Republicans don't mind if their subpoenas are ignored. If the Prez wants to indulge Congress, they're all for that, I suppose, but if he tells his people that they've got more important things to do than go and condescend to Congress, Republican members of Congress are full on board. After all, they're only an equal branch of government, after all (but, as in all things, some branches are more equal than others). Conyers again summed up the situation:

If we countenance a process where our subpoenas can be readily ignored, where a witness under a duly authorized subpoena doesn't even have to bother to show up . . . then we have already lost. We won't be able to get anybody in front of this committee or any other.

Oddly enough, former Judiciary chairman and current ranking minority member James Sensenbrenner had a very strange reaction. "I believe this is an unnecessary provocation," he said. "Absent showing that a crime was committed . . . I think the White House is going to win an argument in court." Maybe I'm oversimplifying things a bit, but it's my understanding that contempt of Congress is in and of itself a crime. If it's not, with a potential cost of a $100,000 fine and a year of jail time, it's got the harshest punishment for a legal act that I've ever seen.

There's more waiting before we get to the next step. The House is very unlikely to vote on the matter before its summer recess next week, so it will be quite some time before the entire House considers the question. It sure looks like Nancy Pelosi is giving the White House time to compromise, but it looks pretty clear that the White House has no interest in compromising. They want to go to the mat. The Democrats have allowed them to pack the courts with right-wing judges, and I'm betting the Prez feels pretty confident that his people will back his position regardless. He may be right, but the Dems need to challenge him, anyway. Conyers is right: The precedents that are being set here are dangerous regardless of who is president. Moving back into optimistic mode, I wonder if Pelosi's giving the Republicans time to go back to their districts to talk to the people and find out the strength of opposition to the Prez's policies so that they'll be willing to stand up to him when they come back into session. At least, that's what I hope she's thinking. If she's instead giving the Prez the opportunity to do the right thing and give Congress their due, she's in for a long wait.