Gee, Clinton is bombing again, wonder why?
January 28, 1999
Review & Outlook
A Failure of Institutions
After seven years of dogged skepticism about the character and values of Bill Clinton and his Administration, we are scarcely surprised to find ourselves in the midst of an impeachment trial. Yet in reading the accompanying extracts1 from our commentary, we are left with the overwhelming impression that this national embarrassment is not merely personal but institutional.
President Clinton, after all, is the product of his genes and environment, notably acculturation in a set of one-party, take-no-prisoners political mores from which Arkansas is only now escaping. Mr. Clinton cannot be expected to change himself, and his record carried plenty of warnings of a morality slippery even by usual political standards. In Arkansas, Paul Greenberg had christened Governor Clinton "Slick Willie." During the 1992 Vice Presidential debates, Dan Quayle accused Al Gore of "pulling a Clinton." As the President prepared to run for a second term, fellow Democrat Bob Kerrey of Nebraska observed that Mr. Clinton "is an unusually good liar. Unusually good."
The impeachment proceedings, with both foes and supporters issuing condemnations of the President, raise an implicit issue. To wit, how did someone of this character come to hold our highest office, and indeed win a second term? A notion is abroad, especially in conservative quarters, that he fairly represents a degenerate electorate. Yet the electorate is prisoner of the choices it is offered and the information it is provided. It relies on our institutions, our elites, to sift and winnow among the shades of gray by which politics and politicians will always be measured.
Much of the blame rests with our two political parties. The Washington Democrats have been ideologically so out of touch that the party has had to seek its Presidential nominees among unknowns. The Republicans, unable to learn from their own success in the 1980s, were unable to muster effective campaigns in either 1992 or 1996.
The press, meanwhile, was often petted out of its watchdog role. A once-proud Justice Department has allowed itself to be turned into a running joke. The Senate, even with a 10-seat edge for the opposition party, has been ineffective in oversight of Justice, tanked two Whitewater investigations, and has failed even to defend its own prerogatives to advise and consent on treaties and appointments. The Beltway social elite and permanent establishment, which did in fact have a pretty accurate sense of the man, was unwilling to sacrifice the fief of a President.
With a two-thirds requirement for conviction and removal, Mr. Clinton will surely stay in office these next two years. The wonder is that he has been held accountable at all. One institution held. The Judiciary checked a whole series of power-grabs, and gave a simple but remarkably determined woman her day in court. Judicial outriders in the FBI and Independent Counsel's office have had their moments, as have a few courageous reporters in the press. The House of Representatives, led by Henry Hyde, finally found its voice.
The hope is that our institutions will come away from these proceedings awakened. That during the balance of Mr. Clinton's term oversight will be vigilant. And that next time around, everyone will take a much closer look at the man to whom they would entrust our highest office.
wsj.com |
