What's at stake when the House votes on the rules of impeachment

On the surface, it's a procedural step that signals the next phase in the impeachment inquiry. But today's vote formalizing the rules for investigating U.S. President Donald Trump is also a politically fraught step — for both parties — that highlights the fact the proceedings are moving more quickly than some may have anticipated.

The House resolution formalizes the impeachment inquiry by establishing the rules for public hearings: who gets to subpoena and question witnesses and for how long. It calls for the House intelligence committee to hold public hearings before writing a report to the House judiciary committee, which will be responsible for drawing up potential articles of impeachment.

For Democrats, it's a chance to show the fruits of their investigation so far, but it also marks a point of no return for some of their members in Trump-friendly districts. For Republicans, it disarms one of their key talking points, while thrusting the substance of the impeachment inquiry into full view.

As a political manoeuvre by Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the vote is an opportunity to blunt Republican concerns that the impeachment process has been unfair and handled behind closed doors.

But some strategists argue that politics was a secondary consideration for the Democrats. They say the testimony that's emerged so far was the key driver for moving to the next stage of impeachment and launching public hearings.

"This isn't, on a 0 to 10 scale, testimony that's a 2 or a 3, it's testimony that's maybe a 9 or a 10, and we need to get this in front of the American people so they understand exactly what kind of constitutional crisis we're in right now," said Democratic strategist Joe Trippi, explaining his view of the timing of the vote.

He says the push to formalize the inquiry was made easier by the testimony of witnesses like chief Ukraine envoy Bill Taylor and Lt.-Col Alexander Vindman, both of whom reportedly bolstered the case that Trump used the power of his office to try to pressure Ukraine's president into conducting a politically driven investigation of former U.S. vice-president Joe Biden, Trump's potential opponent in the 2020 election. 

"The Speaker has been very clear that impeachment wasn't our goal … that we'd have to follow the evidence and see where it goes, and I think this is part of that process," said Colin Strother, a Democratic strategist based in Texas.

Weakening Republican criticism

The strategists also point out that the vote allows Democratic members of the House to combat a key Republican battle cry in the messaging war around impeachment: that Democrats are making up their own rules and not following the proper process.

Democrats argue the constitution doesn't lay out a specific roadmap for impeachment proceedings, and that so far they've followed precedent set by previous impeachment inquiries. The closed-door sessions, derided by the Republicans, were necessary in part, they say, to prevent witnesses from sharing or comparing testimony. 

The president himself made it clear on Wednesday that he wanted the process argument to stop. He tweeted that Republicans are united in their fight against the "Impeachment Hoax" and will go after the substance of the case against him. He also reiterated his belief that his phone conversation on July 25 with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was "a totally appropriate one."

He ended a pair of tweets with marching orders to his party: "Rupublicans [sic], go with Substance and close it out!"

Evan Siegfried, a political and corporate strategist and president of Somm Consulting in New York, wonders how many Republicans will follow those instructions and stop railing against the process.

Many Republicans, including Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, continued their attacks on the impeachment inquiry and the rules laid out in the resolution.

"No due process now, maybe some later, but only if we feel like it," said McConnell, referring to how the rules only allow for participation by the president's lawyers when the inquiry reaches the judiciary committee.

"That's not a standard that should be applied to any American and it shouldn't be applied to the president of the United States," he said on the Senate floor Wednesday.

Siegfried says Republicans will continue to push the process talking point because they need to keep their base aligned with the president. 

"The longer the Republican base stands with the president and says they do not support impeachment or removal, the better it is for him," he said.

Strother says it's difficult for the Democrats to argue against the Republicans' talking points because many of them aren't based on facts.

Many of the Republicans criticizing the process, for example, were members of the committees conducting the closed-door hearings.

Strother describes the battle over impeachment messaging this way:

"We have this thing in Texas about playing chess against a chicken. He'll just knock over all the pieces and crap on the board, then strut around like he won the game."

Trippi says moving the hearings out into the open makes it harder for Republicans to attack the credibility of witnesses like Vindman, a long-serving military officer.

"Let's see how the Republicans treat him in public."

Attacking vulnerable Democrats

For Republicans, the vote does provide ammunition against Democratic members of Congress who won districts in 2018 that Trump had taken in 2016. For those Democrats, the vote is a political risk that could come back to haunt them, no matter what they decide to do.

Among the handful of Democrats who have yet to declare their support for impeachment, Rep. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey has indicated he may not support the motion. 

Siegfried says some Democratic representatives will have to decide what's best for them based on their district.

On one hand, they could be attacked by Republicans they represent.

On the other, they could face criticism from grassroots Democratic groups who have been pushing for impeachment.

"Damned if you do and damned if you don't," he said. "No matter what they do, it's going to be hung over their head by one side or the other."

Longtime Democratic pollster Peter Hart says he doesn't expect the Democrats in those vulnerable districts will feel the sting right away. He says impeachment is a long process that will come with its ups and downs that won't always register immediately with the public.

"There will be back and forth, good days and bad days, outrages and compromises. There's not a day when anyone is going to make up their mind."

Trippi says the statement from seven freshman Democrats last month, in which they declared their support for an impeachment inquiry, and the weight of the evidence that's emerged so far, eases whatever political hit those in vulnerable districts will feel. All seven won in districts previously held by Republicans, and four were victorious in districts in which Trump won the popular vote.

"With each shoe that's dropping in this testimony," Trippi said, "the politics is falling by the wayside and everybody understands there's likely to be a trial in the Senate now."