The roll call votes on December 19, 1998, were starkly partisan. The House of Representatives adopted Article I, alleging perjury before a federal grand jury, by a vote of 228 to 206. Article III, alleging obstruction of justice, passed 221 to 212. Five Democrats crossed party lines to support the perjury article; not a single Republican voted against either charge. The charges stemmed from Clinton’s testimony about a sexual relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky and his alleged efforts to conceal it.
This was only the second presidential impeachment in American history, following Andrew Johnson’s in 1868. The context, however, was fundamentally different. Johnson’s impeachment was a direct clash over post-Civil War Reconstruction; Clinton’s emerged from a personal scandal investigated by an independent counsel. The political atmosphere was polarized, with a Republican-controlled House acting against a Democratic president who maintained high public approval ratings for his job performance.
Public perception often frames the impeachment as a referendum on Clinton’s moral character. The constitutional process framed it as a question of whether his actions met the standard of “high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” The Senate trial the following January answered that question with a resounding no, acquitting Clinton on both counts. Neither article received even a simple majority, let alone the two-thirds required for removal.
The lasting impact was a redefinition of political combat. It cemented a model of investigation driven by independent counsels with broad mandates, demonstrated the power of partisan media narratives, and established impeachment as a weapon within hyper-partisan gridlock. The event normalized a previously unthinkable constitutional mechanism, setting a precedent that would be invoked again within 25 years.