The "fishbowl" seminar we had today got me thinking. I agree with Logan (shock!). Regardless of the offense, President Clinton should not have lied under oath. That is grounds for impeachment. Who wants a president that can't be trusted, even under oath?
However, Logan also believes that the offense was impeachable as well. I disagree.
First, as the article we read asserted, impeachable offenses fall under "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors". Adultery is disgusting and wrong, of course, but it's not a high crime or misdemeanor.
With that in mind, let's move on to reason #2. I researched the punishment for adultery in the United States, and found that it varies state by state. Virginia's maximum penalty is a $250 fine. In Maryland, it is also a small monetary fine. Reading further, I found that Washington DC actually repealed all of their sodomy and adultery laws in 2004, and prior to that, it was again only an offense to be fined. There is NO reason to kick a man out of office for having sex with someone else. Which leads us to reason...
Three. Was President Clinton's leadership ability curtailed by his sexual relations with Monika Lewinsky? No. In fact, according to our textbook, he enjoyed a fairly constant, positive approval rating during his time in office, which is more than we can say for many of the presidents who did not commit adultery.
Finally, not only did Clinton's adultery NOT affect his presidential duties, but it also doesn't fall under what the article we read considered "offenses...which so seriously threaten the order of political society as to make pestilent and dangerous the continuance in power of their perpetrator." The only person who should really be affected is Hillary.
No comments:
Post a Comment