Three Branches Are Enough, Ken

NEW YORK — February 3, 1998 — Regular readers of American Politics Journal are well aware of our antipathy for Independent Counsel Ken Starr's continuing cheap-shot "investigation" of President Clinton.

With the dust finally settling over the controversy surrounding former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, the press and public are now considering the situation more dispassionately. The "bimbo disruption" and subsequent ratings-and-circulation-at-all-cost overkill coverage have subsided, and the public is finally waking up to the damage that Starr is doing to the balance of power between the three branches of government through his exploitation of flaws in the Independent Counsel statute.

Starr's clear and continuing abuse of power is self-explanatory — huge volumes of subpoenas issued in an effort to trawl for even the slightest hint of possible misbehavior to publicly embarrass current and former Clinton Administration officials with, legally ambiguous wiretaps with probably no admissible value in court leaked through a network of cronies to embarrass and discredit the President, wheelbarrows of taxpayer money wasted to "investigate" the personal lives of public figures in what amounts to nothing more than public bedsheet-sniffing.

I will admit that I am not the first of Starr's critics that has accused the Independent Counsel of setting up a fourth "shadow" branch of government to "investivate" the Executive Branch — a clear effort to diminish the power of the Presidency and tip the balance of power toward Congress.

Polls clearly show that most Americans not only approve of President Clinton's job performance, they simply don't care about his personal life. They don't buy the arguments of the President's most vocal and obnoxious foes that he has breached some kind of phoney-baloney "implicit contract" with the public.

Wake up, Clinton-bashers: the only "contract" that applies is the Oath of Office. And Clinton has not merely fulfilled his oath, he's managed to achieve real change: shrinking the deficit, assembling the first balanced budget in three decades, and initiating and implementing changes that have been badly needed in the Beltway, including real downsizing of government. He's even embraced some conservative positions — but he also did that as Governor of Arkansas, a fact that pundits who whine about his "stealing" GOP ideas conveniently ignore.

And, as Bill Schneider pointed out today in his editorial in the Los Angeles Times, even Republicans are benefitting:

"Last week, House Speaker Newt Gingrich's job rating
turned positive for the first time. It would be stupid
for Republicans to try to take advantage of Clinton's
problems by creating paralysis in Washington. The
GOP Congress is up for reelection. They don't need an
anti-Washington backlash."

In other words, Starr has known for some time that he has no court case against president Clinton, and instead has shifted his strategy toward a political offense.

But make no mistake — this is not merely an attack on Clinton. This is an outright reactionary assault on the structure and balance of power in our government which, despite its flaws, is the best and most fair this world has seen.

Starr is doomed to failure if he thinks he can get away with this de facto coup — what has correctly been called an effort to overturn our system of free elections — and for one simple reason: Americans will not tolerate having their voice and their right to vote essentially stripped from them. Congresspersons Bob "Cracker-Boy" Barr, Helen "Helicopters!" Chenoweth and a few flakier right-wing friends of his in the House think they may be able to get away with it, but most of them — including the GOP — know better.

One of the great ironies of having an unregulated Independent Counsel supported with such alacrity by the right wing is that conservatives so strongly support smaller government.

If that's the case, they should all call Janet Reno and demand that Starr be fired for setting up his own branch of government and then legislate clear time, money and staffing limits on future Independent Counsels. Over two centuries of experience are proof enough that, warts and all, three branches are just right.

- Dave "Doctor" Gonzo

PS: Check out the best Ken Starr "fan" site on the web:
http://www.kenstarresign.com

© 1998, 1997, American Politics Journal Publications Inc.