The case for letting senators vote secretly on Trump's fate [View all]

[babylonsister]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/29/opinions/secret-ballot-trump-senate-impeachment-trial-alexander/index.html

The case for letting senators vote secretly on Trump's fate
Opinion by Robert Alexander
Updated 4:54 AM ET, Mon December 30, 2019
"Robert Alexander is a professor of political science at Ohio Northern University and the author of "Representation and the Electoral College." Follow him on Twitter: @onuprof. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion at CNN."


(CNN)Donald Trump will go down in history as the third US president to be impeached. Yet no president has ever been convicted and removed from office as a result of impeachment, and it appears unlikely that Trump will be, either.

While no Republican senator has indicated he or she will vote for Trump's removal, prominent members of the GOP like former Arizona Senator Jeff Flake claim that at least 35 would do so if they were allowed to cast their ballots in secret.

Republican strategist Juleanna Glover has made the case for a secret ballot, arguing that it would be surprisingly simple to accomplish. She contends that it would take just a few Republican senators to demand a secret ballot on the condition that they would approve the rest of the rules governing the trial. Senator Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, regularly points this out to his Twitter followers -- stating that it only takes "four votes for a fair trial."

The idea of a secret ballot, however, is contrary to the norm of transparency that would be expected for such a monumental decision. And it raises the issue of just how accountable elected representatives should be to American voters.

At the same time, members of the Senate have already stated the process will be highly partisan. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham has said, "I will do everything I can to make it die quickly," and added, "I am not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell went further, noting that he would be "in total coordination" with the White House. This, too, is at odds with norms associated with the rule of law, separation of powers and expectations articulated by the Framers of the Constitution.

snip//

If a future president fails to obtain a majority in the Electoral College, the House would decide in a contingent election with no requirement that the commander-in-chief be selected through a public process. It seems that if transparency and accountability are not required in that instance, the same can be said of an impeachment vote.

However, while holding an anonymous vote may allow senators the freedom to make decisions they believe are in the best interest of the country, the need for trust, transparency, and accountability are critical in our current environment. Recognizing that senators would likely vote differently depending on the openness of their decisions is telling, revealing that the impeachment process of the Framers is deeply flawed.
In this way, Hamilton fully understood the need for the Senate to be free of political retribution in order to be an independent and impartial jury. This now seems impossible given how our politics have evolved.