Congress and the Senate approved last Thursday an impeachment inquiry of President Clinton’s actions, which means there will not be a quick end to the investigation surrounding Clinton and his affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinksy.

James Hutter, associate professor of political science, said Clinton’s actions were wrong, but he feels an inquiry is unnecessary.

“I don’t believe Clinton did himself proud. What he did is about as foolish as could be,” Hutter said. “What he has done is embarrassing, shameful, and most of all, just pure stupid, but I don’t think it merits an impeachment.”

Hutter said no one in his or her right mind would answer the questions Clinton was asked in his grand jury testimony with an honest answer.

“He lied in an answer to a question no one had business asking, except Hillary [Clinton],” Hutter said.

Jorgen Rasmussen, professor of political science, felt there already was an inquiry in the form of Independent Council Kenneth Starr’s reports, and he does not believe there is any point to further examine the matter.

“It is not a question of the abuse of power,” Rasmussen said. “The perjury [issue] is minor because [the Paula Jones’ case] was a civil suit.”

Some students, however, feel the inquiry is justified.

“The fact that he lied about his actions is enough to have an inquiry,” said Kasey Willaby, junior in biology.

“If Congress finds through the inquiry that Clinton lied about his affair under oath,” she said, “he should be impeached.”

Doug Stephens, senior in agricultural engineering, also thinks Clinton’s behavior was wrong, and he feels the president should resign.

“His actions were definitely unsuited for the office,” Stephens said. “Anyone in that position should not keep those type of secrets. I think he should resign.”

Stephens noted that the Lewinsky matter is what has caused the most hype, he also is concerned about Clinton’s involvement with other “scandals,” including Whitewater and Filegate.

“He made way too many mistakes.” Stephens said. “Although the Lewinsky [matter] is more noticed, he has done worse. Taking all the things he has done into account, it would merit an impeachment.”

Amy Van Overmeer, an undecided freshman, feels the issues stem from Clinton’s personal decisions, and they do not affect his presidency.

“I like the idea where he apologizes,” Van Overmeer said. “[And Congress] needs to limit the amount of time they look at [the issue].”

Hutter said the impeachment is nothing more than an unnecessary look into Clinton’s personal life.

“[The impeachment inquiry] is not in the interest of the government and not in the interest of the country,” Hutter said. “It’s worse than a soap opera.”

Rasmussen said the impeachment inquiry is being done because of partisan reasons, and he said there is no similarity between past impeachment investigations and this one.

Hutter agreed, calling the investigation a partisan affair.

“[Congress] is out to get him for partisan reasons. It’s not about government; it’s about politics,” he said. “I can’t think of anyone who’s less appropriate [to judge Clinton] than the House and Senate.”

Hutter said there are three grounds for impeachment: treason, bribery and high crimes, and he said Clinton’s actions do not warrant impeachment.

He feels the public’s view of Congress is being tarnished because of the recent events.

Rasmussen said an alternative to an inquiry would be more appropriate.

“I think Congress could pass a resolution: a censure or something of that nature,” he said.