Second, the resolution undermines the president’s political defense. Republicans argued the House’s inquiry is a “sham process.” Absent an impeachment resolution, they say, the investigation lacked transparency, due process rights for the president and the validity of a House vote.

They had a point. Until now, the impeachment inquiry had essentially been based on Speaker Pelosi’s statement at a Sept. 24 news conference. The distinction between the House and the speaker should not be overlooked. The speaker has lots of power, but it is not unilateral. It rests upon the support of the House majority. Without a majority, a speaker’s procedural authority amounts to very little, and that includes impeachment inquiries.

Passing a resolution throws the weight of the House of Representatives behind Speaker Pelosi’s words, clarifying the House’s purpose for judges who have, until now, been forced to interpret whether the House investigations amounted to an impeachment inquiry. It also undercuts Republicans’ process arguments by outlining investigation and hearing procedures and the rights afforded to the president throughout the proceedings.

But perhaps most important, the resolution details the specific roles of committees and members. The impeachment inquiry had raised a lot of questions. Why, for example, was Adam Schiff’s Intelligence Committee spearheading depositions and testimonies from State Department officials and not Eliot Engel’s Foreign Affairs Committee, whose jurisdiction covers diplomatic matters? Given the Intelligence Committee’s central role, would it report articles of impeachment rather than Judiciary, which has historically retained that power?

Politically, the answers appear obvious, but this overlooks the very real tensions behind the scenes. Several committees and chairmen can, and surely have, made legitimate arguments to be central participants in the impeachment inquiry. This resolution, like any offensive strategy, clearly delineates the role various powerful members and committees will play. A dysfunctional team running aimlessly around a field is doomed to lose. The House is no different.

Undercutting the president’s legal and political defenses is an important, but ultimately tangential, purpose of the House’s impeachment resolution. The resolution is most significant to the House Democrats’ game plan.

It anticipates a shift from scouting opponents to devising ways to beat them. It instructs House committee chairmen about their strategy and the scope of their inquiries. It provides a road map for how processes leading to articles of impeachment will unfold. And it ominously signals the first formal procedures that could, and almost definitely will, end in the president’s impeachment.