(8 of 8)
Democrats, meanwhile, grumbled in grim disgust. After reading much of the Starr report, six-term Democrat David Skaggs of Colorado said, "I'm not sure we have a proper basis for impeachment, but I'm pretty sure the effectiveness of this presidency is pretty well destroyed." A six-term Midwestern lawmaker could barely finish his sentences as he tried to sum up his feelings, but he said he suspected Clinton would pull through. "I don't think this is impeachment, but that could turn as this report sinks in." Another Democrat said he was "personally outraged" by Clinton's behavior, but added that Starr lacked all sense of proportion. "He's trying to get Clinton by shocking the sensitivities of the public. There very well may be a snap-back reaction to this." California Democrat Zoe Lofgren said that for all the stomach-turning detail, Clinton doesn't appear to have crossed the bar for impeachment. "If you look at the supporting evidence, it's kind of shaky [on obstruction and tampering]. It's really about sex and lying about sex," she said.
With resignation unlikely and impeachment still unappealing, some on Capitol Hill were thinking that something in the middle might be best. Censuring the President in a symbolic vote by both houses has all the music of compromise that lawmakers love: it sends the moral signal that Clinton's behavior was wrong and unacceptable, but it stops well short of running him off. Both Republicans and Democrats could take their pound of flesh just a few weeks before the election, but without lowering themselves to Starr's level. Under the circumstances, says a presidential adviser, they would gladly settle for a censure. "If we could get a deal, we'd take it and run."
There is no guidance on the books about what constitutes actual grounds for impeachment: Nixon resigned before a Senate trial unfolded. But at the time, a third-year law student named John Whitehead interviewed a congressional candidate on the subject: "I think the definition should include any criminal acts, plus a willful failure of the President to fulfill his duty to uphold and execute the laws of the United States," the candidate replied. "The third factor that I think constitutes an impeachable offense would be willful, reckless behavior in office, just totally incompetent conduct in the office and the disregard of the necessities that the office demands." Years later, Whitehead would found the Rutherford Institute, which financed a sexual-harassment lawsuit aimed at toppling a President. And years later, the candidate would be sitting in the Oval Office, still parsing definitions.
--Reported by Jay Branegan, John F. Dickerson, Michael Duffy and Karen Tumulty/Washington