Dems Revive Contempt Showdown with White House
News: Rekindling a debate on the bounds of executive privilege, the Senate Judiciary Committee moved a step closer to holding Karl Rove and Joshua Bolten in contempt of Congress.
December 13, 2007
|
|
Moving to revive congressional zeal for holding the Bush administration accountable, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed contempt resolutions on Thursday against two of four White House officials who have refused to comply fully with committee subpoenas related to the U.S. attorneys scandal. The resolutions, targeting White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and former Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, passed 12 to 7, with Republicans Charles Grassley of Iowa and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting for the measure.
Specter’s vote came only after his attempts to appease the White House reached an impasse. Specter told the committee that he had accepted the administration’s 's position that presidential aides should be allowed to testify in private, not under oath, and without a transcript. But he drew the line at a White House demand that inquiries into the U.S. Attorney scandal come to an end. "We cannot abrogate or relinquish our constitutional responsibilities," the Republican insisted last week.
Bolten and Rove now face the possibility of being held in contempt by the full Senate, a process that would require a majority vote and that could touch off a showdown in the courts over the limits of congressional oversight and the validity of President Bush's claims of executive privilege.
Perhaps more significant than today's vote—which comes just over a week before Congress breaks for winter recess, making it likely the measure will not be brought before the full Senate for some time—is that it ends a long hibernation of congressional oversight concerning the White House's obstruction of the investigation into the U.S. attorney firings.
In late July, the House Judiciary Committee cited Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers for contempt. On November 5, the committee filed an 800-plus page report with the clerk of the House. The tome was dominated by an enormous minority report, which included a slew of questionably relevant details likely meant to both slow down the process and to set up the Republicans’ argument against contempt charges once the matter makes it to the floor.
A long silence followed the House citations. A number of Democratic aides contend that the delay came in part because the majority has had to tackle a host of major legislative debates—including those over SCHIP, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and appropriations bills.
But critics worry that Democrats have lost momentum in this showdown with the Bush administration. They fear that if Congress does not act soon, and if they fail, there will be broad, lasting consequences for congressional oversight. Worse, some suspect that many members of the Democratic caucus don't want to pursue the fight.
"Many presidents have overreached by claiming executive privilege to hide documents and witnesses from public oversight, and each time Congress has slapped their hands," ACLU's Washington director Caroline Fredrickson said in early October. "Today's Congress must do the same if it wishes to operate as a meaningful and equal branch of government. … It's do or die time for the separation of powers."
Thursday's Senate ruling offers the House an opening to get moving again. It can proceed in a number of ways: The Democratic leadership can bring the committee's citations to the floor promptly for a full vote. It can wait, potentially for a time when both bodies can vote on contempt simultaneously. Or, of course, it can continue to do nothing.
Brian Beutler is the Washington correspondent for the Media Consortium, a network of progressive media organizations, including Mother Jones.
