The Baltimore Sun from Baltimore, Maryland • Page 159

The Sun Thursday, December 17, 1998 Page 31a An impeachment trial to cleanse the regime Opinion Commentary By George F. Will Mr. Clinton might survive a Senate trial in which the nation's welfare, not his soul would be the proper subject. But even if only, sap, 55 senators, rather than the required two-thirds, voted to remove Mr. Clinton, his survival would not mean (as one of his lawyers saps that this all would have been "muck ado about nothing.

0' 'i i SSIVtiitn a I i ir i 1 111 S.MIHiiiirint.HiH.I' 5 I I 1 ir- M- ti 1 provision as inapplicable to the modern presidency because the presidency has grown too great to discipline. Third, what standard of presidential behavior will be endorsed by the House if it votes that not even a Senate trial is warranted by Mr. Clinton's sustained and calculated "private" behavior, which consisted of lying to the public and in two public (judicial) proceedings about behavior in the symbolic epicenter of the nation's public life, the Oval Office? A censure vote Mr. Clinton might survive a Senate trial in which the nation's welfare, not his soul, would be the proper subject. But even if only, say, 55 senators, rather than the required two-thirds, voted to remove Mr.

Clinton, his survival would not mean (as one of his lawyers says) that this all would have been "much ado about nothing." If Mr. Clinton clings to office after majorities of both houses declare him unfit to do so, that outcome can accurately be called: censure. But before assuming that Mr. Clinton's support cannot fall below 34 senators, consider: There is scant affection for him among Democrats. Some senior Democrats loathe him for reducing their party, once exemplified by Sens.

Scoop Jackson, Hubert Humphrey and Mike Mansfield, to a party exemplified by Reps. Jerrold Nadler of New York and Barney Frank of Massachusetts. And some Democrats have made themselves hostage to polls by citing them as sufficient reason not to remove Mr. Clinton. They have planted their feet on the shiftable sand of opinion, and the public may yet come to feel about Mr.

Clinton as many in England came to feel about Caroline: Most gracious queen, we thee implore To go away and sin no more; Or if that effort be too great, To go away at any rate. George F. Will is a syndicated columnist. WASHINGTON When Queen Caroline, consort of King George IV, was accused of adultery, one of her critics made a sardonic salute to some of her defenders: "God save the queen, and may all your wives be like her." A similar toast to Democrats opposed even to a Senate trial for President Clinton: And may all your presidents be like him. Partisan debate about the propriety of a Senate trial proceeds amid bipartisan consensus that there must never be another such president.

His fate largely rests with people Democrats praise for their tepid partisanship, people as "moderate Republicans" and known for inconsistency. (About which Clinton crimes are they moderately miffed? Such are the spars to which he clings in the shipwreck of his presidency, now that the Washington Post, which opposes impeachment, dismisses his defense as "a compound lie," and the New Republic, which opposes impeachment, calls him "a moral and cultural disaster" who is "shockingly capable of degrading just about he touches." Poll watchers Granted, Republicans have mixed motives, some ignoble, for favoring impeachment. Still, savor the rarity of some people unwilling to palter with the truth to pander to public opinion. And salute some of them for an understanding of the popular will far more profound than polls communicate. The reason judicial review unelected judges invalidating acts of elected representatives can be compatible with popular government is that the Constitution 4s the fundamental, the permanent rather than evanescent, will of the American people.

Whoever is scripting Mr. Clinton's various contrition skits misses this point: Serial contrition, carefully calibrated, is oxymoron-ic. Mr. Clinton's current confessional theme, displayed again in the Rose Garden on Friday, is: I am ashamed of what I did to conceal behavior I was ashamed of, so RON HAIBFIELD Demolition targets: These buildings in the 300 block ofW. Baltimore St.

are to be demolished to create an arts plaza as part of a $350 million plan to revitalize the west side of downtown. City's west side plan endangers key buildings Rein in congressional now I have nothing to be ashamed of. If there were a parliamentarian controlling the current debate, he would declare such skits unger-mane. Enough, already, of Mr. Clinton's bulletins on his inner life.

Mr. Clinton, whose self-absorption is the eighth wonder of the world, thinks the current controversy is about the purity of his repentance. He is encouraged to think so by those critics who, steeped in today's confessional culture, say we could "get this behind us" if only Mr. Clinton would come to the front of the tent and testify to having testified falsely under oath. But this reduces an assault on the rule of law to a problem that is half aesthetic and half pastoral.

The vote to impeach should proceed on the understanding that impeachment is not punishment, it is hygiene for the regime. The vote should turn on three questions: First, is it seemly to spare a president even a Senate trial to consider the Everest of evidence of crimes of a sort for which some Americans are in prison? Second, is it necessary to avoid a Senate trial, lest the nation be jeopardized? Such a judgment effectively amends the Constitution by repealing the Impeachment has convinced me that the draco-nian power of impeachment the power to overturn the voters' choice for president should be used only as a safeguard against presidential tyranny, not against day-to-day legal issues that are better left to our courts after a president has left office. By disregarding the standard for impeachment, however, the Republican leadership raises an equally dangerous constitutional challenge the specter of an electoral veto by any Congress controlled by a president's political opponents. I do not impugn the character of my Republican colleagues. I strongly disagree, however, with the ambiguous and unarticulated standard the GOP leadership is using to exercise this awesome power.

I fear that the Republican majority, usually sticklers for interpreting the Constitution in terms of the "original intent of the Framers," has allowed its passions to get the better of its prudence. Despite the prevailing public and legal opinion that Mr. Clinton should be censured or reprimanded but not forced from office, and despite expressions of the president's willingness to accept censure, the GOP leaders threaten to subject this country to the dangerous distraction of a prolonged impeachment trial before the Sen tyranny ate. That's what will happen if the House votes for impeachment today. They have indicated that they will use the procedural power of their majority status to deny any vote on censure.

Mr. Clinton has admitted fault, apologized and indicated that he would accept formal censure by the Congress. A censure resolution would allow the Congress and the country to get back to work on health care, education, Social Security and other substantive issues that affect the daily lives of working Americans. I believe that censure is the better alternative for our nation. An unwarranted, partisan and divisive impeachment debate and trial do not serve our national interest.

The overwhelming majority of the people calling my office, moreover, believes that its 1996 presidential vote and current opinion are being totally disregarded by the GOP leadership. In prayer vigils around the nation, Americans will bow their heads as Congress votes, asking God to guide the GOP House leadership back to the Constitution. I have faith that, ultimately, the voice of the people will prevail. Democratic Rep. Elijah E.

Cummings represents Maryland's 7th Congressional District. By Elijah E. Cummings ON an overwhelmingly partisan basis, the Republican-House leadership appears determined to overturn the 1996 presidential election, forcing President Clinton from office, though a substantial majority of Americans disagree. Most Americans feel, as I do, that independent, counsel Kenneth Starr's allegations against Mr. Clinton (even if proved) do not reach the constitutional level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" necessary for impeachment.

The 19 constitutional experts who appeared before the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, as well as more than 400 historians, 400 legal scholars and 10 out of 12 of the nation's most respected legal authorities, support this popular conclusion. My reading of the Constitution Jury tampering By Arnold Rosenfeld tion lying roughly between the University of Maryland and Charles Center and stretching from Camden Yards to Maryland General Hospital. The basic idea is to clear away the relatively old, small, underused and deteriorating buildings and replace them with new structures containing housing located over such big retail stores as T. J. Maxx and Filene's Basement.

These buildings require a space of 10,000 to 20,000 square feet, two to four times as big as the present buildings. Council plan The City Council has introduced legislation to condemn 127 properties in about six square blocks in the center of this district. Two key parcels include the blocks on either side of the former Stewart's department store on Howard Street and the block across from the Hippodrome Theater on Eutaw Street. Just seven buildings would be spared in this territory, according to M. Jay Brodie, president of the Baltimore Development Corp.

They are the Hippodrome and the Equitable Society on Eutaw Street and the two former bank buildings just north of the Hippodrome, and the old Town Theater on Fayette Street, and Stewart's and the former American National Building on Lexington Street. "There is really an exciting potential for a new neighborhood connecting Charles Center and the University of Maryland," Mr. Brodie said. The west side plan was sponsored by the Weinberg Foundation, prepared by Design Collective, an urban design consultant; architects and planners, and presented in recent public meetings. However, there has been little discussion so far, either in the written plan or public meetings, of the buildings that are to be razed for the new development.

Many of them have historic, architectural and urban merit. The building at 322 W.Baltimore St. is the oldest and finest remaining cast-iron front building here. Knocking it down would be singularly thoughtless in the city that was a pioneer of this form of architecture in the 19th century. Its designer, George H.

Johnson, also created the designs for the famous Haughwout Building in New York, a SoHo landmark, and for iron-front buildings made in Baltimore by the renowned Bartlett-Hayward foundry and erected after the Civil War in Richmond, Va where they have been carefully restored and occupied by prestigious tenants. The hatter's concerns Around the corner from that building, in a more modest structure sits owner Lou Boulmetis, who runs Hippodrome Hatters opposite the theater on Eutaw Street. His grandfather started the business in 1930, when he cleaned hats, shined shoes and cuffed pants for the vaudeville trade. Besides cleaning and blocking, Mr. Boulmetis designs custom-made hats.

"We have a connection with the theater," he said. "I don't think they should lay waste to an entire neighborhood to make it work. This is a vibrant, hustling, bustling area. They want to get rid of businesses that are here and bring in businesses that want to be there. They want our seat at the table." Many preservationists question plans to demolish signature buildings for "big box" retail buildings with little character or appeal.

"The overall strategy is more of a suburban model unlikely to be successful is an urban setting," said Tyler Gearhart, director of Preservation Maryland. James D. Dilts is co-editor with Catharine Black of "Baltimore's Cast-iron Buildings and Architectural Ironwork. By James D. Dilts FROM HIS fifth-floor walk-up loft in a handsome historic building in the 300 block of W.Baltimore David Scheper has a delightful view of downtown, with the Bromo Seltzer Tower as its centerpiece.

His 1889 building, which once housed part of the city's garment Industry, is now home to a variety of artists, who relish its large spaces, which is perfect for creating and displaying art. Mr. Scheper, a 29-year-old ironworker who helped construct the Convention Center's expansion and the Ravens stadium, makes furniture out of scrap metal in his spare time. These days its artistic residents are a bit puzzled by plans to demolish their building for the creation of an "arts plaza" to complement the nearby Hippodrome Theater, which is to receive a $50 million renovation as part of the proposed $350 million plan to revitalize the west side of downtown. This plan, which will dramatically change the character of the area, is the latest outgrowth of a prevalent theory in City Hall and corporate corridors these days: The solution to Baltimore's problems is to knock down the parts of the city that are causing them.

The west side plan calls for widespread demolition in a sec JOHN OVKR14YER become, for better or worse, the "season of giving." It is a time when we celebrate our good for A gift of year-round compassion AS HOUSE members pondered impeachment, they were being subjected to heavy pressure by their congressional leadership and the White House. Pressure from the GOP leadership is incredibly focused on GOP moderates. Republican Majority Whip Tom DeLay has reportedly threatened to ruin any Republican who breaks ranks, voting against impeachment. In civilian life, this would be known as jury tampering, and subject to strict handling by the courts. But the customs of the House, like F.

Scott Fitzgerald's rich folk, are different. That's what confused Mike Espy, the former Agriculture secretary, who thought it was OK to receive carelessly as a Cabinet member what he once took graciously as a House member. Judiciary Republicans were at pains to denounce perjury as an insult to the rule of law. How much better or worse is trifling with the jury? Arnold Rosenfeld is editor-in-chief of Cox Newspapers. I By Veronica Flores SAN ANTONIO It was Christmas Eve last year when a man approached me as I filled my car's gas tank.

He was unemployed and had no immediate prospects of getting a job, with most managers on vacation for the holidays. He asked for money, not for himself, he insisted, but for his 9-year-old daughter to have enough to eat. The cynic in me Immediately wanted to harden against this man. I wondered whether he really had a daughter who needed to eat. So instead of money, I offered to buy the man and his daughter a meal at the fast-food place across the street.

He accepted, though he protested that I was spending far more than the few dollars he'd asked for originally. He said that he could have bought a whole tune, the rationale goes, and many thus feel compelled to share it with others. It's as if hearts and pockets have been conditioned to open only once a year. Who says it has to stop there? The plight of the poor is a year-round crisis. Some social workers observe that the needs of such a population are so daunting, cynicism can overtake.

I'll admit I was nearing that point before I gave in to the thought of Earl's daughter going hungry on Christmas Eve. But the gift of thanks I received in return sparked my compassion anew. I welcome another chance to get that warm, fuzzy feeling from helping others, even if it comes in the heat of July. Veronica Flores is a columnist for the San Antonio Express-News. I chicken and stretched it beyond one meal for the price of the fast food.

We talked. He told me his name was Earl. His little girl was Tanya. We shook hands. When we got the food order, I also gave him a few treats I had in the car baked goods and a gift left over from a party for needy children.

Earl thanked me profusely, so much so that I was embarrassed. I mention my encounter with Earl because of a conversation I had the other day with the head of a local arts program for urban youth in San Antonio. He complimented my newspaper's holiday series spotlighting nonprofit agencies, but commented that the newspaper makes such an effort only-once a year. That's not unlike most communities, where the period between Thanksgiving and Christmas has.