As Members of Congress, many of our decisions are easy ones. Should the federal government operate under a balanced budget? Absolutely. Should welfare recipients be encouraged to work? Of course they should.

However, sometimes our choices aren't so easy. The process we are discussing today is the most serious constitutional action Congress can take short of declaring war. None of us should take this process lightly.

All but the President's most ardent apologists agree that he lied to the American people, lied to the court in the Paula Jones case, and lied to a federal grand jury probing his conduct. It is just as evident that he worked to obstruct judicial proceedings by tampering with key witnesses and evidence.

No amount of willful ignorance or rationalization will make these facts go away. We may not like these facts. They may make us sick to our stomachs. They may cause us to question some of our most basic assumptions about the President and the presidency. But, we must confront them. To do otherwise is to knowingly treat the President differently than the rest of us.

Many of my colleagues on this committee have devoted their lives to fighting inequality and ensuring equal justice for all Americans. This is one of the highest causes a Member of Congress can champion. For this reason, I am saddened to see these same members of our committee working tirelessly to return inequality and special treatment to our law, in order to protect a President they favor. Make no mistake about it; the precedents we set in this matter will remain part and parcel of our legal system for years to come, damaging or benefiting each of us, regardless of the political party to which we belong.

All of us who attended church growing up are familiar with the story of Abraham and Isaac. When God demanded that Abraham sacrifice his only son, Abraham was willing to do it because he realized there truly are principles that rise above the life of one person, no matter how great a love we have for that individual. This is the highest form of devotion, and it is exactly the choice we face today. If impeaching Bill Clinton is necessary to protect our Constitution and preserve the rule of law, do we have the courage to do it? I hope and pray that the answer is yes.

If any other citizen -- for example, Ken Starr -- had perjured himself, even for the best of reasons. I have no doubt all of us, especially those on the other side of the aisle, would urge his prosecution. Indeed, the President's own Department of Justice has prosecuted numerous cases of perjury, including a recent case in which a federal employee lied about sex in a civil suit. As a federal prosecutor appointed by President Reagan, I convicted and jailed a sitting Republican Member of Congress for perjury. Perjury and obstruction of justice are not partisan issues. They are grave offenses that strike at the heart of our legal system; the principle that all who participate in our court proceedings must tell the truth, is the most fundamental underpinning of our society.

At best, today's hearings will cast a dim light around the edges of a term the Founding Fathers intentionally left up to future congresses to define. Trying to arrive -- in advance of the evidence -- at a precise definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors," is the intellectual equivalent of debating how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, or trying to determine whether a tree falling in the forest makes a noise if no one is there to hear it. It may be interesting to engage in such talk around a coffee table or in an ivy league ivory tower, but it bears no relationship to the real world of legal or government proceedings.

Ultimately, the choice of whether or not to vote articles of impeachment rests not with legal scholars or historians, no matter how distinguished their pedigrees. This choice is ours, and sooner or later, we're going to have to make it; or else families, teachers, and prosecutors will have to pay the price as they cope with current and future generations of liars and perjurers.

In the final analysis, I don't think there are many Members of Congress who can say directly, and with a straight face, that a President can commit numerous felonies and stay in office. Either all the lofty phrases we eagerly repeat at every opportunity mean something, or they don't. Either all Americans are equal under or law, or some Americans -- a New Royalty -- deserve special treatment. Either truth is the most valuable commodity in our legal system, or it is worthless.

Let us use this unique opportunity to shape this debate, define the issues, and lead the process, rather than continue -- as so many have -- to react, respond, pontificate, and run out the clock. Our constitutional clock, now a mere 211 years old, must be kept running. Our colleagues 25 years ago, and their impeachment staff, including Hillary Rodham, recognized the importance of this, and so must we.