Listen Now:



387

Bored with Local Governance, the Cambridge City Council Aims to Impeach Trump

By  |  April 4, 2017, 02:05pm  |  @Andy_Crawford_

Cambridge, Massachusetts is most widely known as the home of  two of America’s greatest academic institutions: Harvard and MIT.

What most Americans may not know is that the city is currently challenged by a large homeless population, which has plagued the greater Boston area more and more over the last several years. There are not enough shelters for hundreds of homeless individuals and families experiencing the frigid Massachusetts winters.

Cambridge is also plagued with an extraordinarily high crime rate. Its crime rate is higher than 97% of other cities of a similar size (about 100,000). MIT and Harvard made the Daily Beast’s list for one of the most unsafe campuses in the nation.

With such serious issues confronting one of America’s most historic cities, the Cambridge City Council is focused on what really matters: the impeachment of Donald Trump.

The council passed a resolution Monday urging the House of Representatives to  direct the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the 45th President of the United States. In the opinion of the suburban New England council, there is sufficient evidence of President Trump’s violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Article I Emoluments Clause to form the basis of an impeachment.

“From the moment he took office, President Trump was in violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause and the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution,” the resolution reads, in part.

“It’s a matter of safeguarding the Constitution,” Councilwoman Jan Devereux, a sponsor of the resolution, told the Harvard Crimson.

Councilman Nadeem Maze said, “Donald Trump has flown in the face of the Constitution. Betting odds recently had impeachment at, what, 56 percent.”

This isn’t the first time the Cambridge City Council has weighed in on national issues. Most notably, the Cambridge City Council voted to end the Vietnam War, and called on the Reagan Administration to institute a freeze on the development of nuclear weapons. In recent years, the city council passed resolutions criticizing Israel and changing Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day.

In a move that would no doubt please Trump, they passed a resolution against the Trans-Pacific Partnership in 2016.

Of course, Cambridge isn’t alone when it comes to radical leftist cities wading into national politics. Several cities in California, including Richmond, Berkley, and Alameda have passed similar impeachment resolutions, as well as Charlotte, Vermont.

Liberals, it seems, become bored with local politics. Progressivism demands a national, one-size-fits-all policy imposed on everyone. Everything is political, and all political issues are national.

Everyone needs to be covered by the exact same type of health insurance policy, and every second grader needs to learn exactly the same curriculum. The amount of handicap parking spaces at your country store need to be mandated by a federal agency, and your backyard garden falls under EPA regulations.

One of the basic tenets of conservatism is federalism. Not every issue demands a national policy. Some issues, such as homelessness, education, and transportation, demand different answers for different areas of the country. The policies needed to effectively address education, poverty, and transportation in Cambridge, Massachusetts may be much different than the those implemented in Birmingham, Alabama.

Given the Left’s philosophical indifference to dynamic and diverse local government, it’s no surprise that city council’s in the deepest blue areas of the country spend their energy virtue signaling on national issues of which they have no concern. Better to make national headlines with a useless resolution than confront the difficult tasks of local governance. Like the Left’s protest culture, it’s simply the leadership tactic of the lazy.

There is no other reason why a city council representing 100,000 people in the suburbs of Boston should concern itself with the actions of Israel 6,000 miles away, America’s nuclear arsenal, or the financial affairs of a President who exists within a federal system well equipped to check his power.