As much as I think Dave Hergert is a putz, I don't think his impeachment is appropriate. As Matthew Hansen points out, the debate seems to focus more on moral conceptions of right and wrong than on the legality of the vote. While it is fine for the public to offer up simple arguments like "what he did is just plain wrong and therefore he should be kicked out of office", I'm bothered that our state senators are using the same rhetoric. When politicians start using "it's just wrong" as a justification for their actions, somebody (or a group of somebodies) is going to get screwed.
It's easy not to get fired up about these indiscretions when the involved party is somebody like Mr. Hergert. I don't know if Mr. Hergert is really the villain he has been portrayed to be, but the guy really hasn't done much to exonerate himself in the eyes of Nebraskans. He could really use some PR training.
But not getting fired up is, in the eyes of the politicians involved, the practical equivalent of supporting their actions. I support their disdain for Mr. Hergert, and I agree with the tongue-lashing Mr. Hergert has received from the Legislature. But his impeachment -- which went against the best legal advice of nearly everybody the Unicameral consulted -- I do not condone. Long story short, the Unicameral has voted to waste taxpayer resources to engage in what in all likelihood will turn out to be a quixotic and short-lived adventure through the courts. Will our senators' quest to prove their moral superiority prove worthwhile? Doubtful, especially when one considers all of the time and energy they could have put into more productive pursuits.
Dave Hergert's impeachment will benefit no one and punish at most one person. Is that a cost-benefit ratio you're willing to support?
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
No comments yet! Be the first.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.