Professors debate open impeachment deliberations

By CHERYL FRANKENFIELD
Collegian Staff Writer

President Clinton's impeachment trial begins at 1 today, but the Senate has not decided whether the public will be able to view the entire trial proceedings.

Essentially the trial has three parts: the hearing of arguments, the Senate acting as the jury of the trial and, traditionally, the deliberating on the case in closed session and the reading of the verdict.

Members of the media and some senators hope to open the senate debate to the public. U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Min., want to have deliberations between senators made public.

But Clay Calvert, assistant professor of communications and law, said some procedures need to be closed in order to protect the integrity of the process. At the same time, he said, a more open trial would be beneficial to Americans because it would allow them to get more first-hand information.

On the other hand, said Bob Richards, associate professor of communications and law, this trial is unusual because it is not a typical civil or criminal case. In an ordinary trial, jury deliberations are closed, but this is a political procedure, Richards said.

"The senate is an open body," he said, "(and I) would be in favor of keeping the entire process open."

Any scandalous material Monica Lewinsky or Linda Tripp might say is "nothing the American public hasn't heard already," he said.

If graphic material is going to be on television, it is up to parents to determine whether their children watch the trial, Jessica Scarcelli (junior-elementary education) said.

"People who care about (the trial) should definitely know everything going on," Scarcelli added.

The public has heard most of the evidence already, so the whole trial may as well be televised, Steve Rice (senior-electrical engineering) said.

If the trial were to be entirely open, Richards said, the public would not just hear the interpretation of sources through reporters, who are "well plugged" into their sources. Whether parts of the trial are opened or closed, the public will get most of the information because reporters are close enough to the trial to find and relay the facts anyway, he said.

"We get to see the whole deliberative process of the senate," which is already on television, Richards said, and "I think that is a benefit."

Although Richards said he believes the trial should be left open, he can see some disadvantages to it.

"News organizations will hone into the more intriguing details. The majority of the public will hear sound bites," he said, adding many Americans work and most will not tune into the live coverage.

"Grandstanding" by certain senators and a less-than-candid debate are reasons Richards cited for a semi-closed trial.

Senators may worry about what they look like in front of the camera, rather than the issues at hand, said Brian Senger (sophomore-chemical engineering).