An Open Letter to the Asbury Park Press Editorial Board

An Open Letter to the Asbury Park Press Editorial Board:

Congressman Chris Smith has refused to condemn Trump’s abuse of power, and has taken a public stance against the impeachment inquiry. His statement reads:

“We must have only one objective: providing the American people the truth. But I do not support this inquiry that is being initiated by the speaker for impeachment. I want the truth, but in order to initiate an inquiry there has to be the allegation of serious wrongdoing and illegal high crimes and misdemeanors."

Smith is wrong, there need not be “illegal” high crimes and misdemeanors. The judgement of what is and is not impeachable is left to Congress regardless of criminal statue. And Trump has broken the law - asking a foreign government for help in an election is illegal. Additionally, an inquiry, (what Smith is against,) is how we discern the truth, (what Smith claims he wants.) Lastly, if Smith simply wanted the information from the whistleblower complaint before rendering judgement on the merits of an inquiry, he has had that and more for weeks now. He has not changed his position, and voted against the House rules and procedures for moving forward on October 31st.

The evidence against Trump is clear and compelling, and Smith’s history reveals a far lower standard for what is and is not impeachable. Smith supported impeaching Clinton every step of the way, including when they only allegation was for receiving foreign help in an election. He strongly intimated that a refusal to cooperate with an inquiry indicates guilt. And he insisted that the Obama administration send aid - the same aid that Trump withheld for political gain - to our “good friend and ally Ukraine” to counter Putin, because “people are dying.”

Your paper consistently endorses Smith for re-election. You overlook his abhorrent record on reproductive and LGBT rights by stating that you “disagree” with him but feel his moderate and bipartisan record are worth the price. In fact, you’ve been using similar language to wash your hands for decades.

There are moderate and bipartisan qualities to Chris Smith, but he must also deliver the statesmanship you ascribe to him when it is difficult. We are at such a point now. When weighed against Trump’s abuses and the acquiescence of his party, Smith’s genuinely good but generally non-controversial bipartisan accomplishments are not enough to balance the scales.

As a senior member of his party, Smith could provide political cover for other Republicans. He could inject a degree of seriousness and bipartisanship necessary to unite more of Congress in defense of our democracy. Denouncing Trump’s behavior would not require Smith to abandon any of his other conservative principles. He would be lauded for his bipartisan leadership, courage, and integrity. And since Smith received a greater percentage of the vote than Trump in NJ-04, it would not be a tremendous political risk. It is time for Smith to lead, and you must ask it of him.

As the largest publication in Smith’s district, the opinion of your editorial board carries significant weight. If you are going to repeatedly justify endorsing Smith based on bipartisan leadership, you must call for him to deliver it when it is needed most. Otherwise, you are accepting Smith’s archaic views on reproductive and LGBT rights without the benefits you cite for absolution.

Waiting until a final impeachment vote will be too late. Smith is already on record against the inquiry. He cosponsored a Republican attempt to censure Adam Schiff that also disparaged the Mueller investigation. And even though the impeachment rules and procedures passed by the House provide Trump’s defenders more opportunities than have been afforded other presidents, Smith voted against them. Collectively, this shows that Smith has accepted Trump’s behavior and the Republican narrative that the impeachment inquiry is illegitimate. It will only become harder to uproot this narrative as time goes by.

If Trump’s abuse of foreign policy and disregard for election law go unchecked or are only challenged along party lines, we risk voters accepting it wholesale or writing it off as mere political sniping. Only bipartisan condemnation will send a strong enough message that this is not acceptable. If Smith, with forty years of service and a reputation for sound judgement doesn’t have the courage to step forward and guide others in his party, who can?

You must call on Smith to be the sensible leader you endorse. Ask Smith to justify his position on Trump’s behavior. Ask him to justify his vote and statements against the inquiry. And ask him to change course now, before it’s too late.