WASHINGTON – Back on June 21, less than two months after Chandra Levy disappeared, I called for Rep. Gary Condit, D-Calif., to resign from Congress.
Many people thought that call was premature. It may well have been the first public call for him to quit.
Now, five members of Congress have come to the same conclusion, including at least one prominent Democrat, Rep. Charles Stenholm of Texas.
And there’s good reason for that – Condit continues to stonewall. He continues to act like Bill Clinton. He continues to hide behind the skirts of his high-priced legal talent. And, most importantly, he continues to sit on the House Intelligence Committee, where he has access to the nation’s top security secrets.
It’s unconscionable. It’s unbelievable. It’s dangerous. And it’s an awful precedent.
Yet, I continue to hear people defending Condit’s presence in the House of Representatives using the same tired excuses we heard during much of President Clinton’s impeachment battle: “He hasn’t been convicted of anything. He hasn’t been formally charged with breaking the law. In this nation we regard people as innocent until proven guilty.”
In other words, the new standard in American politics is that our elected officials have a “right” to hold their office until they are convicted of a high crime or misdemeanor. Not only is there no higher standard for elected public officials than there is for the ordinary citizen, there are special protections for these guys. They deserve, if anything, a bigger benefit of the doubt.
I think that’s nuts. That’s not the way our system was designed. That’s not what the founding fathers envisioned. It’s not common sense.
Today, because of the Chandra Levy mystery, the Monica Lewinsky affair, the Gary Studds scandal and other similar incidents of moral turpitude for which there has been no punishment, no price to pay, no immediate consequences, parents would be well-advised to keep their children from going to Washington to serve as interns and pages at the highest levels of the federal government.
It wasn’t that long ago that a scandal like this would have resulted in an automatic resignation from Congress. We can thank Clinton and his apologists for setting the new lower standard.
No matter what happened to Chandra Levy, one thing is clear today – and has been for weeks: Condit carried on what even Clinton would characterize generously as an “inappropriate relationship” with the 24-year-old. He abused his powerful position and the glamour and allure that go with it to seduce a young and impressionable young woman. It’s the oldest story in the book, going back to the days of King David and before, no doubt.
Condit isn’t talking anymore. Instead, he’s acting like a man who has something to hide – adding immeasurably to the torment and anguish of Chandra Levy’s parents. But, as a matter of public interest, Gary Condit is thoroughly compromised. He cannot carry out his duty any longer. He cannot serve the people’s interest. He can only fight for his own narrow personal interests by hanging on to his high-profile position.
That’s why just as I called for him to resign five weeks ago, I am now calling on his colleagues to unseat him.
I know that’s not going to happen tomorrow. I understand how Washington works. I’m not na?ve politically. After all, incredibly, the House has not even begun an Ethics Committee investigation of Condit yet.
But, let me tell you, no investigation is necessary. What we know about Condit’s conduct already – what we’ve all seen for ourselves in the last few weeks – is more than enough for the House to act to unseat him.
It’s time to do so for two reasons:
- Condit abused his powerful position to seek sexual favors from Chandra Levy and others. It’s another case of old men in Washington selfishly exploiting their positions rather than using those positions, as they should, to help set a moral standard for the nation and to bring dignity to their office. It’s time to set a higher standard – or at least attempt to regain the vestiges of the old standard.
- Because Condit is compromised politically and personally and obviously has much to hide, he is subject to blackmail. No member of Congress should be permitted to serve under that kind of cloud – least of all someone serving on the House Intelligence Committee.
We said it all before – during the Clinton scandal. Not even a private citizen running a private corporation would be allowed to maintain a position of power under such a cloud. How can we tolerate it for a member of Congress?
I have no doubts that Condit will ultimately go. The pressure on him will only increase. At the very least, he will be out of Congress after the next election cycle. So, why should the nation be forced to endure this nightmare any longer? Why should the Levy family be tortured? Why should we allow our government’s national security secrets to be compromised?
There was once an old saying in American politics about those elected from “safe” districts: “Only two things could unseat him – being found with a dead girl or a live boy.” Where we’ve descended in American politics in recent years proves that both those alternatives are no longer fatal politically.
Are we better off or worse off as a nation for it?
Condit ran on a slogan of “Setting a good example.” Now that it’s clear he hasn’t and won’t, it’s time for his colleagues to do so by showing him the door.
Previous columns:
The Chandra Levy disappearance
