'Fast and Furious' stars a lame Washington

A constitutional clash between Congress and the president that doesn't have to happen.

Barring a last-minute deal, the Republican-led House is poised today to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt — an unprecedented move — for refusing to turn over documents related to Operation Fast and Furious, an ill-fated program to track weapons purchased in the U.S. to Mexican drug cartels. To back up his attorney general, President Obama has asserted "executive privilege," arguing that releasing internal Justice Department documents to Congress would chill future frank discussions within the executive branch.

Once again, Republicans and Democrats are moving to the brink of war when the controversy could have been settled with a modicum of good sense and good-faith negotiations — both of which are in short supply these days in Washington.

A little background: Fast and Furious was launched in 2009 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). The Obama administration wasn't the first to use this risky tactic — the operation was patterned on one used by the Bush administration — but it should certainly be the last.

The ATF's Phoenix office let hundreds of weapons "walk," in bureau jargon, so agents could track them. Instead, the agency lost the trail. Many ended up at murder scenes in Mexico. Two were found at the site of a tragic shootout in Arizona, where a U.S. border patrol agent was killed in 2010. Congress began to investigate.

In a Feb. 4, 2011, letter, a top Justice Department official, responding to Senate inquiries, denied that the ATF had allowed guns to walk. After whistle-blowers and news reports proved that claim false, Holder was forced to admit it. He denounced the tactics, said they'd never be used again and turned over documents showing how the false letter came about.

By then, however, publicity hungry Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and his investigatory committee were hot on the trail of a potential cover-up. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, went as far as to suggest that the mere assertion of executive privilege shows White House officials were involved in misleading Congress. Even Issa acknowledged on Sunday that no such evidence exists. Even so, he is seeking internal documents created after the Feb. 4 letter, the request at the root of the current showdown.

With a few exceptions, fights over executive privilege between the White House and Congress have historically been resolved through negotiations that give investigators access to what they need while preserving the confidentiality of sensitive information. That should be the goal in this case, too.

Why let reason prevail, though, when there are election-year points to be scored? The National Rifle Association— which has fought the kind of limits on gun sales that might have made Fast and Furious unnecessary — has jumped into the fray, declaring it will count today's planned action in its voting report cards.

Yes, the executive privilege claim seems lame. But if the House rushes to make Holder the first attorney general in history to be held in contempt, it will look like it's running an inquisition, not a fair-minded inquiry.