Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Some Senators Plan to Vote on Roberts
AP ^ | 9/22/5

Posted on 09/22/2005 3:38:33 PM PDT by SmithL

All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote for John Roberts' confirmation as Supreme Court chief justice next week. The 44 Democrats are less unified.

Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (8):

Bill Nelson of Florida, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Max Baucus of Montana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Kent Conrad of North Dakota.

Democrats who voted for Roberts on the Judiciary Committee (3):

Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; baucus; bennelson; billnelson; bingaman; byrd; judgeroberts; kentconrad; pryor; robertshearings; timjohnson

1 posted on 09/22/2005 3:38:35 PM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL

The Democratic Senators are all in red states and or up for re-election if they hold and IF the Republicans can hold ranks, I think we have some white smoke and a new Chief Justice Roberts. But as with anything in politics, who knows until the final vote.


2 posted on 09/22/2005 3:52:22 PM PDT by GWB00
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Important (to me anyway) John Roberts quote I found today from 1997 discussing recent Supreme Court Decisions:

"JOHN ROBERTS:
Well, they (SCOTUS) were acknowledging their limitations, but I think it's important not to have too narrow a view of protecting personal rights.
The right that was protected in the assisted suicide case was the right of the people through their legislatures to articulate their own views on the policies that should apply in those cases of terminating life and not to have the court interfering in those policy decisions. That's an important right as well. "
3 posted on 09/22/2005 4:04:10 PM PDT by msnimje (Cogito Ergo Sum Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL



51 votes puts a "W" in the "W's" Column. That is all he wants.



4 posted on 09/22/2005 4:05:49 PM PDT by msnimje (Cogito Ergo Sum Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote for John Roberts' confirmation as Supreme Court chief justice

No Democrats Need Apply

5 posted on 09/22/2005 4:06:28 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Really? "Robert Byrd of West Virginia"?


6 posted on 09/22/2005 4:14:08 PM PDT by pobodys nerfect
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Argus

55 Republicans and 5 Democrats makes it filibuster proof.


7 posted on 09/22/2005 4:22:28 PM PDT by SmithL (There are a lot of people that hate Bush more than they hate terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Adding up those who voted against in committe and those who announced against, there are 11 Democrats opposed.

Adding up those who voted for in committe and those who announced for, there are 11 Democrats in favor of confirmation.

So as of now, the Democratic Caucus is split down the middle. But only one of those "for" is from a safe Democratic state and most of the uncommitted Democratic senators are from safe states. So I would expect most of those who haven't yet come out "for" will in fact vote "against."


8 posted on 09/22/2005 4:27:02 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pobodys nerfect
"Robert Byrd of West Virginia"?
Red State. Up for reelection next year . . .

9 posted on 09/22/2005 4:28:18 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pobodys nerfect

Byrd wants to prove that he isn't senile.


10 posted on 09/22/2005 4:33:21 PM PDT by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I think they must have drawn straws to see who would vote against THIS TIME...


STATEMENT OF SENATOR HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ON THE NOMINATION OF JUDGE JOHN G. ROBERTS TO BE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thu Sep 22 2005 18:54:45 ET

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm


11 posted on 09/22/2005 5:22:28 PM PDT by Maria S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: msnimje

Come on, it takes 60 votes to get the democrats to sit down so a vote can be taken until the rules are changed.


12 posted on 09/22/2005 6:31:05 PM PDT by Whispering Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Whispering Smith
Come on, it takes 60 votes to get the democrats to sit down so a vote can be taken until the rules are changed.

No, I meant when the votes are taken, he only needs 51 when it is over.

13 posted on 09/22/2005 6:40:50 PM PDT by msnimje (Cogito Ergo Sum Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson