portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

government | imperialism & war | police / legal

Santa Cruz, CA Calls for Bush's Impeachment

The Santa Cruz City Council became the first in the country Tuesday night to demand a congressional investigation that could theoretically lead to President Bush's impeachment for the war in Iraq.
Santa Cruz calls for Bush probe
Letter to House judiciary panel largely symbolic

Wednesday, September 10, 2003

The Santa Cruz City Council became the first in the country Tuesday night to demand a congressional investigation that could theoretically lead to President Bush's impeachment for the war in Iraq.

At least it could lead to impeachment if there was the slightest chance that a Republican-dominated House Judiciary Committee would comply with demands from tiny, lefty Santa Cruz.

And not even the most ardent supporter of last night's 6-1 vote in Santa Cruz gives that possibility much hope.

But the coalition of peace groups that placed the item before city officials Tuesday are hoping that other communities will follow Santa Cruz's lead, creating a ripple that will be felt in Washington, D.C.

Councilman Tim Fitzmaurice said that the U.S. news media, Congress and citizens suspected that the Bush administration had misrepresented the reasons for going to war but were afraid to speak up and demand the kind of government investigation now taking place in England.

"It's time for us to just open up this can of worms," Fitzmaurice said. "We're just doing our little part to break the ice."

The city's official position consists of a letter to the House Judiciary Committee outlining "concerns expressed by many residents of Santa Cruz about President Bush's actions regarding the recent war in Iraq.

"Please determine if one or more of the following represent impeachable offenses by the President," the letter asks.

The letter lists six questions, regarding the administration's alleged disregard of international treaties, use of arguably misleading information to make the case for war and suspected constitutional infringements to aid in the pursuit of terrorists. The letter also asks whether use of depleted uranium on the battlefield, the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and a program to deploy new nuclear weapons are warranted.

"In my opinion, this list could go on for page after page after page," said Councilman Scott Kennedy, who agreed that the list be limited to six items for brevity's sake.

Of the approximately 75 people attending Tuesday night's council meeting, only three spoke against the measure. And one of those, Paul Sanford, a professor at Monterey College of Law, said he considered the administration's position to be "morally bankrupt and indefensible."

But Sanford, who carries a copy of the Constitution folded up in his wallet at all times, said that nothing in the city's litany of accusations met the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors" required for impeachment.

Another dissenter, Sylvia Mullen, said the council was "living in an academic utopia completely oblivious to the deterioration of the community in which we live," and she urged them to leave national issues alone.

The lone vote against the measure was cast by Councilman Mark Primack, who agreed that the council should limit its efforts to local issues, despite his own reservations about the war. But Councilman Mike Rotkin argued that even small governments should vigorously promote the views of their residents. And Councilman Ed Porter applauded his city's activism, especially in light of polls showing that 70 percent of Americans believe that Iraq was involved with the attacks of Sept. 11 -- a connection that has never been proved.

As for Mayor Emily Reilly, "I am so grateful to live in this community," she said.

The City Council previously voted to oppose the war in Iraq and the USA Patriot Act.

homepage: homepage: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/09/10/BA296721.DTL

And? 15.Sep.2003 12:58

PoohNTigger

What about the business owners who don't agree with the city council? what if they begin to loose business because of this?

I guess they didn't think of that little tidbit did they? I'm curious to see what happens in the coming months.

Of course, probably nothing will happen. Who pays attention to Santa Cruz anymore?

Bad for Business? 15.Sep.2003 13:14

fuck business

Oh yes, those poor business owners. How dare government not let them decide. Best do away with government altogether, and let business be business.

News Flash 15.Sep.2003 14:36

PoohNTigger

Without those business owners paying taxes, you don't have a local government. Now if you're supporting less government interference with business owners, that I'm all for.

Here's how this scenario could play out.

City council passes an amendment that inflames a certain part of the community. Those consumers decide to take their businesses elsewhere. said businesses dry up from lack of customers, Then they move away to greener pastures.

Now we have a cut in revenue. At that point, your local government is hurting to provide services i.e. police, fire, etc. due to the lack of tax revenue. Also people are unable to get what they want locally. What does the local government do? that's right - Raise taxes. People get pissed and decide to move as well.

A mean little circle isn't it? Rule of thumb: You keep your major businesses happy and the rest is gravy.

Be that as it may, the entire point is academic. Nothing will come of this.

BU**SH**! 15.Sep.2003 14:57

fuck business, impeach bush

"Without those business owners paying taxes, you don't have a local government."

Wrong. Local government is funded by local property taxes, the majority of which are paid by citizens. In fact, in CA, many communities whore themselves out to big business for the illusion of "more jobs," and give major tax breaks to businesses that individuals don't get. It's a form of corporate welfare.


another point 15.Sep.2003 15:23

PoohNTigger

"Local government is funded by local property taxes, the majority of which are paid by citizens"

and where do the citizens get their money? don't many of them live and work in that community?

If the businesses dry out, where do the citizens get the money for the property taxes?

I caught the "Impeach bush" tag on your reply. Face it, you don't give a rats ass about this community. It's just another call to impeach, another banner to rally around for you.

Personally, I think it's hilarious. California: land of fruits and nuts strikes again. They deserve anyone they vote into office.

Ass Backwards 15.Sep.2003 15:53

TiggerNPooh

Businesses exist to serve communities, though most Amerikans have forgotten this point.

Don't be such a willing slave.

PS: Vote To Impeach! 15.Sep.2003 15:55

impeachment is for liars

It's fast--it's easy!

 http://votetoimpeach.org/


Pooh 15.Sep.2003 16:20

anonymous

You're making a big assumption that this resolution would negatively impact business in that city. Unless you have a comprehensive study of the business climate in Santa Cruz that shows this to be so... that's not an assumption we can make.

It's very likely that there are business people on the board. Not all business people are Bush supporters.

It's just one little city, and they've made their opinion known. Why does that bother you so much?

Born In The USA 15.Sep.2003 16:31

Go Bruce!

Excerpt from NYC-IMC:

Meanwhile, it appears that New Jersey rock and roll legend Bruce Springsteen has join the growing chorus of Americans calling for impeachment.

During Springsteen's concert in DC Saturday night, he reportedly told concert goers "It's time to impeach the president and get a man in there to get us out of this mess," Springsteen reportedly followed his impeachment exhortation with complaints about past and present elected leaders who have misled the country. During a Boston performance this past Wednesday, Springsteen prefaced his rendition of "Born in the U.S.A." with a statement he termed "a public service announcement" about holding our political leaders accountable.


Actually it doesn't bother me 15.Sep.2003 20:22

PoohNTigger

It really doesn't bother me. CA has been making weird decisions for years.

It bothers me that the actions of some who think they know better could hurt others who didn't agree with that decision.

Not to worry, PoohandTigger 15.Sep.2003 20:42

mimi

Santa Cruz businesses will fare just fine. People are tiring of the same old corporate crap.

Speaking of those who think they know better... 15.Sep.2003 20:48

Impeachment is for Liars

"It bothers me that the actions of some who think they know better could hurt others who didn't agree with that decision."

Hurt others? Like these Iraqi kids?


that's sad 16.Sep.2003 00:03

Sean Henderson

Cluster bombs, depleted uranium, use on an urban environment, .....

Why isn't Bu$h locked away in a cage for crimes against humanity yet?