Editorial: Senate should open impeachment debate

Tuesday, Feb. 2, 1999 | 11:30 a.m.

Most Americans probably don't know it, but when the Senate eventually debates whether President Clinton should be removed from office, Senate rules mandate that these deliberations be conducted behind closed doors. The anachronistic rule originates from the 1868 impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson.

Sens. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., have been at the forefront in calling for the impeachment debate to be conducted in public, noting that the 19th-century rules were established when much of the Senate's business was done in private. Both of Nevada's senators, Democrats Harry Reid and Richard Bryan, also believe the debate should be in the open.

Impeachment and declaring war are Congress' two most grave responsibilities. It would be unthinkable if Congress debated secretly whether to go to war. It is unconscionable, then, that Senate rules don't allow a public debate and accord impeachment the solemnity it deserves.

Secrecy by the legislative branch may be warranted in exceptional circumstances, such as when a congressional committee is examining sensitive matters that could jeopardize national security if revealed. But there is no sound reason why the impeachment debate -- on what is essentially overturning the outcome of a national election -- shouldn't be open to the public. Some may fret that senators will engage in grandstanding and political posturing if the debate were open to the public, but this sidesteps the issue of the necessity for open government.

The public deserves to know why the Senate either believes there is sufficient evidence to convict Clinton or believes the House has not built a strong enough case. If the Senate wants the public to have faith in its decision on this momentous issue, then it should change this rule and allow for a full and open debate.