Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative William Hungate
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative William Hungate
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative William Hungate (D - Missouri).
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative William Hungate
Peter Rodino (D - New Jersey). The gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Hungate, is recognized for 3 minutes and 30 seconds. William Hungate (D Missouri). Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this Article and feel more strongly about it than any other. I respect those who disagree and as I hear the arguments I think I know why there are no lawsuits in Heaven. The other side has all of the good lawyers. I am sorry to disagree with my colleagues, but I do. And I disagree with Professor Bickel too. It strikes me, that in United States v. Nixon Mr. St. Clair's argument was based on the fact that this was an intra-executive branch squabble which they should not enter and based his argument on Professor Bickel's writings. As I recall, Professor Bickel did not approve of the one man, one vote decision, Professor Bickel. He was wiser then perhaps. I do not always agree with him. He is not always right. In democracies and republics we face different problems than totalitarian countries where rulers can dismiss the legislatures. In republics, they ignore the people's representatives at their peril. Anyone can claim the Fifth Amendment and get it. And that includes the President. I think we wouldn t have any argument about that. But, how are we to obtain evidence? We got it in this case by accident.
Impeachment Hearings. House Judiciary Committee, July 30, 1974. Statement of Representative William Hungate
When you talk of the separation of powers and the confrontation we face here, I am indebted to another fine Congressman, the late George Andrews from Alabama for my education on this subject that deeply impressed me. We do have three co-equal branches. But as Speaker McCormick used to say, "All Members of the Congress are equal, but some are more equal, than others." I think all branches of government are equal, but some are more equal. You can become President without being elected. We have had some tragic assassinations. Lyndon B. Johnson and Andrew Johnson both became President without being elected. In fact, Andrew was never elected. You can go to the Supreme Court without being elected. You can go to the Senate without being elected. Members serve there and they are never elected. They go back and they are simply appointed. But, you cannot come in the House of Representatives without passing before the People and being elected. And you only serve for 2 years. You had better be close to the people, you had better refresh your mandate. This is the reason why I think the Founding Fathers put the sole power of impeachment in the Congress, the power to impeach the President, in the Congress, the power to impeach the Supreme Court Justices in the Congress, and the ultimate power in the case of confrontation, I submit, should be in the body nearest to the People, closest to the People's control. I submit the House of Representatives is that body, and I cannot acquiesce in agreeing that it is an inferior body, or in making it one now. If we are to simply push papers, there are many paper pushers of independence who will choose to do that elsewhere. I urge approval of Article III.