History begs to differ

The editorial “The Impeachment Trap” (BDN, Sept. 25) supporting Democratic Congressman Mike Michaud’s decision not to impeach Cheney and Bush because it would risk Democratic Party chances in 2008 makes perfect sense. Look at what happened in the 2000 election after the Republican-controlled Congress impeached Clinton. The Republicans swept Congress and the White House after impeaching Clinton.

Look at what happened after the Democratic Congress impeached Nixon and he resigned. Democrat Jimmy Carter was elected president in the next election and Democrats retained both houses of Congress.

Let’s see, the previous impeachment was President Andrew Johnson, who was impeached by a Republican Congress in the 19th century. After that impeachment Republican Ulysses Grant was elected president.

Let’s look further back. There must be evidence somewhere in history that impeaching the president is risky for the party’s re-election chances.

In the elections following all U.S. presidential impeachments the impeaching party won.

We know that impeaching the president or vice president will cause a backlash by voters. Michaud’s office said it. The Bangor Daily News editorial supported him. Why isn’t history supporting that theory?

Randall Parr

Appleton