CNN/AllPolitics - Storypage, with TIME and Congressional Quarterly
Democrat bucks party line to vote with GOP in Clinton hearing
January 28, 1999
Web posted at: 1:03 a.m. EST (0603 GMT)
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, Jan. 28) -- Sen. Russell Feingold broke ranks with fellow Democrats Wednesday when he voted with Republicans in the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton.
Feingold voted against a motion to dismiss the trial and voted in favor of a motion to allow the deposition of three witnesses.
The 45-year-old Wisconsin Democrat was the only senator to break party solidarity, putting him in the company of the Senate's 55 Republicans while the other 44 Democrats voted the other way.
He stressed his action in no way expressed how he might vote in the final determinations of whether Clinton should be removed from office.
Feingold issued a written statement regarding his votes, but refused to take reporters' questions.
In the statement, he said dismissing the case now would "improperly short- circuit this trial."
He added that the House prosecutors must have "every reasonable opportunity" -- including testimony from witnesses -- to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clinton should be removed from office on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice.
Republican endorsement
Stubbornly independent Feingold did not quite provide the level of bipartisanship Republicans had hoped for, but they were grateful nonetheless.
"We have one Democrat who was willing to stand up to his own caucus," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Let me tell you, that was a big-time thing."
Feingold said it was only fair to give House prosecutors more time to attempt to prove the impeachment allegations.
Feingold's move surprised few who know him.
In his hard-fought re-election campaign last year against Republican congressman Mark Neumann, Feingold took the unusual step of ordering negative ads about his opponent taken off the air and rejecting commercials on his behalf paid for with "soft money."
And in the Senate he has been a leading advocate of campaign reform legislation unpopular with many colleagues in both parties.
As for his Senate votes Wednesday, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., said Feingold had indicated that he had concern especially about the obstruction of justice article and "wanted to hear witnesses before he reached his judgment on it."
Feingold had previously sought separate dismissal votes on the two articles and said in his statement that one of them "comes closer to the core meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors."
Lieberman, who stunned the White House in September with a speech highly critical of Clinton's conduct and urged some formal disapproval, said he respected Feingold's position and told him "not to worry about his votes."
Most Democrats avoided direct criticism of Feingold. "I think he voted his conscience," said Sen. John Breaux, D- La. "It's an indication we didn't try to break arms and insist on a caucus vote."
His votes cracked an otherwise straight party line showing by Democrats and Republicans, putting Feingold in the company of the Senate's 55 Republicans while the other 44 Democrats voted the other way.
"My view, as of this moment, is that to dismiss this case would in appearance and in fact improperly 'short circuit' this trial," Feingold said in a statement after the votes.
Feingold said it was possible he could support a motion to adjourn or dismiss at a later stage of the trial, "although I strongly prefer that this trial conclude with a final vote on the articles."
The Senate is considering two articles of impeachment against Clinton, perjury and obstruction of justice, related to attempts to cover up his affair with Lewinsky.
"It would have allowed the Senate to consider the strength of the evidence presented on the two separate articles and the possibility that one of the articles comes closer to the core meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors than the other," Feingold said.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by j2k4
Well you didn't even do that
Bookmarks