House Democrats heard two sides of the impeachment question during their caucus this afternoon.
Rep. David
Zuckerman, P-Burlington, has been gathering sponsors for the resolution and explained his reasoning to the Democrats. He argued, "If we don't take this action and say it is not worth it, that it is too political," it tells future presidents "you can get away with it." By it,
Zuckerman means acts of questionable legality.
Democratic House Speaker Gaye
Symington then stood before the packed caucus to explain why she would vote 'no' if she had the chance to vote. (As speaker, she won't vote unless there is a tie. Not likely) Last Friday,
Symington said she would send the resolution to committee, but changed her mind, she explained. "It's clear to me we should bring up the resolution for a vote in order to get back to our work."
Things got emotional when
Symington explained that she "deplores the values and actions of this president and vice president." Choking on her words, she said she's horrified at the"damage that has been done."
She said the last election brought political change and led to investigations that have caught the attention of all Americans, regardless of what color state they come from. "We're coming back together as a country again," she said. "I want to keep the country on track, moving forward." She worries that impeachment proceedings would fracture the country -- again.
Zuckerman also spoke to the House Republican caucus. Rep. David
Sunderland, R-
Rutland, criticized the time that will likely be spent debating the resolution. Lawmakers ought to focus on the important bills still pending during these final weeks before adjournment, he said.
Zuckerman countered that even if the House spent several hours on the impeachment debate, it wouldn't make any difference on how soon work wraps up on major legislation. He said there are plenty of other reasons that bills are currently stuck.
The word in the building is, the resolution will fail by a significant margin.
-- Nancy
Remsen
