Krugman on Why Obama Should Hold Bush Admin. Accountable (Updated: Comments from Conyers)

by Deb Cupples |  A few days ago, I blogged about the self-contradictory answer that President-elect Barack Obama gave during an ABC interview regarding whether he would hold investigations into the many abuses of the Bush Administration.  Some people seem to think the answer indicates a big, fat "No."

Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman explains, in some detail, why the Obama Administration should seek accountability:

"I’m sorry, but if we don’t have an inquest into what happened during the Bush years — and nearly everyone has taken Mr. Obama’s remarks to mean that we won’t — this means that those who hold power are indeed above the law because they don’t face any consequences if they abuse their power.

"Let’s be clear what we’re talking about here. It’s not just torture and illegal wiretapping, whose perpetrators claim, however implausibly, that they were patriots acting to defend the nation’s security. The fact is that the Bush administration’s abuses extended from environmental policy to voting rights. And most of the abuses involved using the power of government to reward political friends and punish political enemies.

"At the Justice Department, for example, political appointees illegally reserved nonpolitical positions for “right-thinking Americans” — their term, not mine — and there’s strong evidence that officials used their positions both to undermine the protection of minority voting rights and to persecute Democratic politicians [like former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman]...."

"There’s much, much more. By my count, at least six important government agencies experienced major scandals over the past eight years — in most cases, scandals that were never properly investigated. And then there was the biggest scandal of all: Does anyone seriously doubt that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into invading Iraq?

"Why, then, shouldn’t we have an official inquiry into abuses during the Bush years?

"One answer you hear is that pursuing the truth would be divisive, that it would exacerbate partisanship. But if partisanship is so terrible, shouldn’t there be some penalty for the Bush administration’s politicization of every aspect of government?

"Alternatively, we’re told that we don’t have to dwell on past abuses, because we won’t repeat them. But no important figure in the Bush administration, or among that administration’s political allies, has expressed remorse for breaking the law. What makes anyone think that they or their political heirs won’t do it all over again, given the chance?

"In fact, we’ve already seen this movie. During the Reagan years, the Iran-contra conspirators violated the Constitution in the name of national security. But the first President Bush pardoned the major malefactors, and when the White House finally changed hands the political and media establishment gave Bill Clinton the same advice it’s giving Mr. Obama: let sleeping scandals lie. Sure enough, the second Bush administration picked up right where the Iran-contra conspirators left off — which isn’t too surprising when you bear in mind that Mr. Bush actually hired some of those conspirators.

"Now, it’s true that a serious investigation of Bush-era abuses would make Washington an uncomfortable place, both for those who abused power and those who acted as their enablers or apologists. And these people have a lot of friends. But the price of protecting their comfort would be high: If we whitewash the abuses of the past eight years, we’ll guarantee that they will happen again." (NY Times)

Yes, that's dead-on right and a matter of common sense -- especially to anyone who has raised children.  If our nation's officials know that they can do whatever they want without facing very uncomfortable consequences, then they will continue abusing power and even breaking laws. End of story.

Update: in a Washington Post t op-ed today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers commented, in part, as follows:

"I understand that many feel we should just move on. They worry that addressing these actions by the Bush administration will divert precious energy from the serious challenges facing our nation. I understand the power of that impulse.

"Indeed, I want to move on as well -- there are so many things that I would rather work on than further review of Bush's presidency. But in my view it would not be responsible to start our journey forward without first knowing exactly where we are.

"We cannot rebuild the appropriate balance between the branches of government without fully understanding how that relationship has been distorted. Likewise, we cannot set an appropriate baseline for future presidential conduct without documenting and correcting the presidential excesses that have just occurred.

"After the Nixon imperial presidency, critical reviews such as the Church and Pike committees led to fundamental reforms that have served our nation well. Comparable steps are needed to begin the process of reining in the legacy of the Bush imperial presidency."

A few days ago, the House Judiciary Committee released a 400+ page report that details some of the Bush Administration's abuses.

Memeorandum has commentary.

Other Buck Naked Politics Posts:

* President Bush's Farewell Address (Blogger Round-up) 

* Was Bush Bad for our Nation's Economy?

* Justice Dept. Lawyer Claims White House Found Lost Emails

* Judiciary Committee's Negative Report on Bush Admin.

* Bush Admits to Approving Torture...

* Yes, but Will Obama Hold them Accountable?

Comments

[All Mi T]

I hope he dont it will be a distraction for with respect to the economy, No end in sight

http://rawdawgb.blogspot.com/2009/01/no-end-in-sight.html

[Buck Naked Politics]

HI rawdawg,

Happy new year!

I disagree, of course.

I don't see it as an either-or proposition. Fact is that Congress has 535 members, and the federal government has thousands of employees.

We have enough people that we can devote less than 1% to investigating what the Bush Admin did and STILL have more than enough manpower to deal with the economic crises (and other issues).

[J.Corbin]

It seems fair to presume..that if we took an investigator or 2 away from the task of determining if there was a shooter on the grassy knoll...and other such pressing matters of immediate threat to National Security...I am sure that the little matter of $10,000,000,000,000 of budgetary surplus disappearing in the first 90 days of Mr.Bush's illustrious first term might be worth a look.And that is just for openers.Perhaps the members of the judiciary who were sorely used and left on the curb might also be willing to participate in an above-board commitee to discover what,if any,violations and misuse of power under the Constitution might be applicable in the case of this administration's persuits.It is really amazing how the economy suddenly went bad...Almost like a catastophic diversion to mask the getaway of the gang...Oops...too many episodes of the Cisco Kid...

[J.Corbin]

It seems fair to presume..that if we took an investigator or 2 away from the task of determining if there was a shooter on the grassy knoll...and other such pressing matters of immediate threat to National Security...I am sure that the little matter of $10,000,000,000,000 of budgetary surplus disappearing in the first 90 days of Mr.Bush's illustrious first term might be worth a look.And that is just for openers.Perhaps the members of the judiciary who were sorely used and left on the curb might also be willing to participate in an above-board commitee to discover what,if any,violations and misuse of power under the Constitution might be applicable in the case of this administration's persuits.It is really amazing how the economy suddenly went bad...Almost like a catastophic diversion to mask the getaway of the gang...Oops...too many episodes of the Cisco Kid...

[J.Corbin]

It seems fair to presume..that if we took an investigator or 2 away from the task of determining if there was a shooter on the grassy knoll...and other such pressing matters of immediate threat to National Security...I am sure that the little matter of $10,000,000,000,000 of budgetary surplus disappearing in the first 90 days of Mr.Bush's illustrious first term might be worth a look.And that is just for openers.Perhaps the members of the judiciary who were sorely used and left on the curb might also be willing to participate in an above-board commitee to discover what,if any,violations and misuse of power under the Constitution might be applicable in the case of this administration's persuits.It is really amazing how the economy suddenly went bad...Almost like a catastophic diversion to mask the getaway of the gang...Oops...too many episodes of the Cisco Kid...