I’ve had the privilege to talk to Carl Levin face-to-face, albeit briefly, on a few occasions. At some point after leaving the Senate, I jokingly said something I can’t remember now. He responded saying that I’m naïve.
I said something about him giving advice to Republicans about… I’m sorry, I really can’t remember. It is true that in his time in the Senate, Levin (D-Michigan) often worked with Republicans for the common good.
And now, as he seeks to educate voters about the importance of congressional oversight, he continues to work with Republicans. The most recent instance is an op-ed he wrote with former Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) in Roll Call.
We both served for many years in the Senate, and here’s what we observed: When oversight hearings were held more for political purposes than for real fact-finding purposes, they didn’t work. Hearings like these may have been the exception rather than the rule, but they damaged Congress’ reputation. They didn’t uncover the facts, and they didn’t have the confidence of the American people.
…
Equally important is what Madison didn’t say [in the Federalist Papers]. He didn’t mention political parties in describing Congress’ responsibilities, because the Constitution itself doesn’t mention political parties. It doesn’t reference either a majority or minority party — it speaks to the institution as a whole. It is Congress’ job — not a Republican or Democratic majority’s job — but Congress’ job to oversee the executive branch. ...
What that means is that Congress as an institution should engage in oversight in a bipartisan manner. That can be challenging for Democrats ... and for Republicans ... But this is not the time for table-turning, revenge or arrogance. This is the time to re-establish the constitutional, institutional mandate and responsibility of Congress as a whole for bipartisan, fact-based oversight by both the House and the Senate.
Both Levin and Lugar are realistic about the chances for this happening. After giving a few examples of bipartisan cooperation on oversight from a decade ago, they write that
The examples go on and on — but this kind of bipartisan cooperation seems almost unimaginable in today’s climate.
In a few days, we’ll be part of the country’s first Oversight Summit, where top bipartisan oversight scholars from NGOs, Congress, and the executive branch will come together to exchange ideas on how to chart a path forward to keep the federal government accountable. It’s a discussion that is long overdue and necessary for the health of our democracy.
Congress has been at its best when members of both parties donned their institutional role and jointly engaged in meaningful, fact-based, bipartisan oversight of all components of the federal government. That is what millions of Americans voted for on Tuesday, and we urge the leadership in both houses to make it happen.
Part of what makes this so challenging is that the person who currently holds the title of “president” is, to put it kindly, ethically deficient.
Of course it wouldn’t help Levin’s purpose of setting an example of bipartisanship to mention that politically biased investigations have pretty much always been led by Republicans.
Can anyone give me an example of Democrats putting on something like the Benghazi hearings? You know, the ones that uncovered the fact that Trey Gowdy can sweat a lot as Hillary Clinton stays cool as a cucumber.
Maybe Senator Lugar would cooperate with Democrats to uncover the truth about emoluments, collusion and other worrying things. But that’s a moot hypothetical, because Republicans with a conscience are now relics of a simpler time.
I can’t speak for millions of Americans. Speaking only for myself, I voted in part for accountability on emoluments and collusion.
Maybe impeachment is still off the table, but at least Democrats should bring some important facts out into the open, no matter how much Republicans want those facts covered up.