58 to 42

January 31, 2006

The floor vote on Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court nomination went largely according to the script, with 58 votes for and 42 votes against. Of that small cadre of moderate, pro-choice Republicans, only Rhode Island’s Lincoln Chafee voted against Alito. It was, as MSNBC noted, the most partisan vote on a high court nomination in modern political history, at least in terms of the number of lawmakers breaking party ranks.

Among the Senate’s Dems, four voted to confirm — Byrd (W. Va.), Conrad (N.D.) Tim Johnson (S.D.), and Nelson (Neb.).

In case there was any confusion, the Washington Post initially reported that Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) voted to confirm. He did not. (The Post has corrected the record.)

Alito will be sworn in by John Roberts at the Supreme Court in a private ceremony later today, will appear at tonight’s State of the Union address, and will be ceremonially sworn in a second time at a White House East Room appearance on Wednesday.

As for my perspective on all of this, nothing’s changed since my post from this morning.

What I don’t understand is why Byrd, Conrad, and Johnson all voted for Alito, but voted against Janice Rogers Brown or why Conrad, Johnson, and Nelson voted against Priscilla Owen.

Do they really believe those nominees were worse/more important than Alito?

And why would all those Democrats who voted to filibuster these nominees not vote to filibuster Alito?

What standard where they using?

  • Eugene Oregon, it appears they’re all relatively pro-life, or at least sympathetically-enough. Those senators’ wikipedia bios indicate as much.

    Byrd “takes a moderately conservative position on abortion.” Conrad “is one of the few members of the Democratic Party to have voted consistently in favor of banning the procedure commonly referred to as “partial-birth” abortion. He also opposes public funding of abortion.” Nelson’s “views on the subject are more in keeping with some of the Senate’s pro-life Republicans.” Johnson’s bio doesn’t offer any hint of his feelings on abortion, however.

  • Rian,

    Every nominee filibustered by the Democrats were “relatively pro-life” – William Pryor was explicitly pro-life and yet Byrd, Conrad, and Johnson all voted against his confirmation – and all three voted to filibuster him as well.

    I am just trying to figure out what possible reason these senators had for voting against Pryor for a seat on the 11th circuit (or any of the other appellate court judges) but voting for Alito on the Supreme Court.

  • Eugene, I think the problem with Alito is he isn’t “explicity” pro-life. Any pro-lifer will be quick to point out that he said in his confirmation hearings that he wouldn’t pre-judge, that he’s fair and respects precedent, and they’ll do it so fast you’ll get whiplash. So I’m guessing for some of these senators in these tight spots there is a plausible deniability factor to their votes, these four Dems in particularalong with a lot of Republicans. They can’t vote against the right who know who they are getting, but maybe they hope they’ll fool their party enough that they were voting for a fair guy, at least enough to win the nomination in 2006 or 2008 or 2010. And also, senators can get away with going against their constituents’ wishes when it comes to appellate court nominees (party solidarity over personal beliefs and constituent opinion?), but not so easily when it comes to a Supreme Court nominee.

    I dunno. I’m just speculating.

  • I have to confess I was wrong a few weeks ago
    in guessing that more Democrats would vote
    for confirmation than oppose it. That’s good
    news.

    Now we can only hope with politics behind
    him, Alito might mellow out as others have
    done and move toward the left a bit. If not,
    we’re in for some troubled times, I’m afraid.

  • That’s was the maddening thing about all this, aside from the fact that Alito actually made it. The progressive forces, mostly the blogosphere, actually moved the ball a long ways considering that, a week ago, it wasn’t moving at all. If only it had all begun a week earlier….

  • weasally freakin spineless Dems. one has to wonder how much those 42 really opposed Scalito since, had 42 Senators voted to uphold the filibuster there would be no Justice Alito. i was not a big fan of the filibuster because i didn’t think we had the numbers but if 42 were willing to vote no, its too bad they had to wait and do so when they could hide behind the impossibility of the nomination failing.

    • Comments are closed.