[the ADTC announcement continues:]
If one may judge by their public comments, some of the 25 opposing the resolution in fact supported impeachment.
They were apparently troubled, however, by Town Meeting’s addressing a matter that they believed not to be its legitimate business.
It was obviously a difficult position in which to find oneself. But it does mean that there was even more TM support for impeachment than the figures suggest.
The resolution itself is well-crafted and short. It is Article 2 on the TM website for last night’s meeting:
Carol Gray, the Town Meeting member proposing this resolution, acknowledged the ADTC’s passage of an impeachment resolution in her survey of the increasing national support for impeachment and removal.
Thanks to those on the ADTC impeachment committee who have got the ball rolling!
[end of ADTC announcement]
Amherst’s representative town meeting is the primary legislative body for the town — it has 240 members with 24 elected from each of ten precincts. In most precincts the slate of candidates is not full, so we essentially have government by volunteers. (The Select Board, the executive branch, has five members elected for three-year terms in what are sometimes competitive races.)
We in the “People’s Republic of Amherst” are famous for addressing national and world issues through our local government — IIRC the TM once prohibited the town from doing business with Burma — but this vote struck me as being of interest. The other articles on this particular TM warrant (linked to above) are also of general rather than local interest — I think the TM has adopted a policy of collecting these items into a single session.
In next Tuesday’s election Amherst voters also have a local question on the ballot, as to whether our state rep should be directed to support a resolution calling for immediate withdrawal from Iraq.
Last I checked Amherst was located in the United States. So any “national” issue is by definition a town issue as well.
I hope that if the Democrats do retake the House and the Senate that the people we elect are smarter than the Amherst Town Meeting. There is so much that needs to be done and impeachment is not one of them. For example, Congress needs to focus on amending the domestic surveillance law, the perscription law, and the bankruptcy law, all of which were enacted or amended to the detriment of many by the Republican Congress. I do think there should investigations into government contracting in Iraq and some other such activities, but to squander the time the Democrats will have in Congress before the next election on impeachment proceedings would be stupid. Impeachment should only be considered an option if the President clearly has violated a law; i.e., no one can dispute it. Otherwise, we Democrats need to move the country’s agenda forward to tackle more important issues.
I posted partly for snark about the self-importance of the Amherst TM, but I agree with you on the substance. I think GWB and The Dick deserve to be impeached, and I’d vote for a resolution saying that they should be, but I wouldn’t urge a hypothetical new Democratic US House to actually do it at this point. Until or unless we can isolate an unambiguous crime that won’t be viewed by the GOP senators as a policy difference, we would never get two-thirds in the Senate to throw the bums out and make Pelosi President. As you say, there is a host of bad legislation that they’ve passed. We can’t repeal it with the House, or even the House and Senate, alone, but we can highlight it and make it a 2008 campaign issue. And we can investigate, because it’s the Congress’ job, it’s the right thing to do, it helps the 2008 campaign, and it might even turn up that unambiguous crime.