Obama’s Vote in Illinois Was Often Just ‘Present’

[Karmadillo]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?ref=politics

In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois Legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.

In the end, Mr. Obama chose neither to vote for nor against the bill. He voted “present,” effectively sidestepping the issue, an option he invoked nearly 130 times as a state senator.

Sometimes the “present’ votes were in line with instructions from Democratic leaders or because he objected to provisions in bills that he might otherwise support. At other times, Mr. Obama voted present on questions that had overwhelming bipartisan support. In at least a few cases, the issue was politically sensitive.

The record has become an issue on the presidential campaign trail, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, his chief rival for the Democratic nomination, has seized on the present votes he cast on a series of anti-abortion bills to portray Mr. Obama as a “talker” rather than a “doer.”

Although a present vote is not unusual in Illinois, Mr. Obama’s use of it is being raised as he tries to distinguish himself as a leader who will take on the tough issues, even if it means telling people the “hard truths” they do not want to hear.

more...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. He's a truth teller... he WAS present.

[TwilightZone]

2. I don't know why...

but that made me laugh.

When sarcasm becomes nearly inseparable from sincerity....

[durrrty libby]

3. Yep, Mr Wishy Washy

[geek tragedy]

4. They call Hillary a liar on the second page:

Seven other times, he voted that way as part of a broad strategy devised by abortion rights advocates to counter anti-abortion bills.

Pam Sutherland, president of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, said Mr. Obama was one of the senators with a strong stand for abortion rights whom the organization approached about using the strategy. Ms. Sutherland said the Republicans were trying to force Democrats from conservative districts to register politically controversial no votes.

Ms. Sutherland said Mr. Obama had initially resisted the strategy because he wanted to vote against the anti-abortion measures.

“He said, ‘I’m opposed to this,’” she recalled.

But the organization argued that a present vote would be difficult for Republicans to use in campaign literature against Democrats from moderate and conservative districts who favored abortion rights.

Lisa Madigan, the Illinois attorney general who was in the Illinois Senate with Mr. Obama from 1998 through 2002, said she and Mr. Obama voted present on the anti-abortion bills.

“It’s just plain wrong to imply that voting present reflected a lack of leadership,” Ms. Madigan said. “In fact, it was the exact opposite.”

Will Hillary stop these misleading and dishonest attacks?

[aquart]

9. But his habit was to duck difficult issues.

The fact that he used his charm to talk the Planned Parenthood Council into going along with it, doesn't actually change that habit of ducking. I'm interested in his ability to make political cowardice look like political courage. That'll come in handy.

Lisa Madigan, who defends Obama, ALSO voted "Present." Defending him defends herself, doesn't it?

So no, Hillary was NOT dishonest. Obama DID vote "Present." And since the point was that he made a habit of ducking issues by voting "Present, and he DID duck issues by voting "Present," she was not misleading, either.

Although I know you wish she were.

Your man's an opportunist with an eye to the main chance. Embrace it. You will be so much less disappointed in the future.

[geek tragedy]

15. You didn't read the article.

Planned Parenthood talked him into voting present, not the other way around.


Thanks for playing.

[leftynyc]

16. On another thread it states he

voted present 130 times. So your answer for the other 129 votes would be.......?

[zulchzulu]

5. Ah...but you forgot to conveniently not add this part to the OP...

Yeah...there was "more..."

Mr. Obama’s aides and some allies dispute the characterization that a present vote is tantamount to ducking an issue. They said Mr. Obama cast 4,000 votes in the Illinois Senate and used the present vote to protest bills that he believed were drafted unconstitutionally or as part of a broader legislative strategy.

“No politically motivated attacks in the 11th hour of a closely contested campaign can erase a record of leadership and courage,” said Bill Burton, Mr. Obama’s spokesman.

An examination of Illinois records shows at least 36 times when Mr. Obama was either the only state senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

In more than 50 votes, he seemed to be acting in concert with other Democrats as part of a strategy.

(snip)

In other cases, Mr. Obama’s present votes stood out among widespread support as he tried to use them to register legal and other objections to parts of the bills.

A nice hit piece title that the facts about having one's Senate vote scrutinized as a cheap political ploy again falls flat.

[Karmadillo]

6. Don't DU rules limit the number of paragraphs we can snip? And

didn't I post a link to the article so people could read it in its entirety?

[wyldwolf]

20. you conveniently forget the paragraph limitation rule and the provided link

[CyberPieHole]

7. Although this is one of the reasons I don't support his campaign...

his vapidity is the main reason why I am not buying what he is selling. If Oprah finds him so great he must be quite banal. Nothing she recommends is worth spending a dime or time on.

[Pirate Smile]

8. Since he taught Constitutional Law while also in the State Legislature, the idea

that he had objections to certain bills based on the Constitution makes sense. He had been a Civil Rights Attorney also.

Constitutional Law Senior Lecturer - http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/14/21433/589/757/422317
Civil Rights Attorney - http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/12/15/113124/87/613/422461

Since I already posted the links above to the Diaries on when he was a Civil Rights Attorney and a Constitutional Law Senior Lecturer, I'll add that one about his time as a Community Organizer http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/17/10223/596/194/422872

[aquart]

10. Explain to me, ever so slowly, why voting "NO" was not an option?

Aren't constitutional objections excellent reasons for voting "NO" on a bill?

[Maven]

13. Then he should have voted against them and spoken out against them

You're trying too hard. Really.

[obamian]

11. Chicago NOW Director who is a Hillary Supporter "This line of attack is unacceptable"

the campaign released a statement from Chicago NOW director Lorna Brett, who devised the strategy on abortion issues that led Obama to vote present, saying “I am a supporter of Hillary Clinton and an Emily’s list donor, but this line of attack is unacceptable. While I was the president of Chicago NOW, Senator Obama worked closely with us, could not have been more supportive of a woman’s right to choose, and there was no bigger champion in Illinois on our issues.”
http://cameron.blogs.foxnews.com/2007/12/04/emilys-list-goes-after-obamas-leadership-on-choice/

[Maven]

12. Mr. Personality wanted to remain a blank slate for as long as possible

In the end he stands for...himself.

[oasis]

14. If contemplating one's navel counts as experience, Obama's got my vote.

:party:

[Didereaux]

17. Check out the number of NVs on his Senate record...(and which issues)

http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490
National Security Issues
(Back to top)
Date Bill Title Vote
11/16/2007 Supplemental Appropriations for the Department of Defense and Timeline for Withdrawal from Iraq Y
11/16/2007 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for the Department of Defense N
10/16/2007 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008 NV
10/03/2007 Border Fence and Customs Appropriations NV
09/26/2007 Expressing the Sense of Congress Regarding Federalism in Iraq NV
09/26/2007 Expressing the Sense of Congress Regarding Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps NV
09/19/2007 Habeus Corpus for Detainees of the United States Y
09/11/2007 Limiting Mexican Trucks to Commercial Zones Near the Border Between the U.S. and Mexico Y
08/03/2007 Foreign Intelligence Acquisition N
07/26/2007 Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act NV
07/26/2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations NV
07/26/2007 Border Fence and Customs Appropriations NV
07/26/2007 REAL ID Funding NV
07/19/2007 Sense of the Senate on Guantanamo Bay Detainees NV
06/06/2007 Law Enforcement Review of Z Visa Applications N
03/13/2007 Implementing 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act Y
09/13/2006 Security of Cargo Containers Amendment Y
09/12/2006 National Security Amendment Y
07/12/2006 Rail and Transit Security Amendment Y
07/11/2006 USEMA Amendment Y
07/11/2006 FEMA Amendment Y
03/02/2006 USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Y
12/16/2005 USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization N
07/14/2005 Disclosure of Classified Information Amendment Y

[rucky]

18. I bet he won't vote at all if he's President.

gawd!

[Lurking Dem]

19. Again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3866656&mesg_id=3866912

[desi]

22. Still sounds kinda shady....

"Your senator voted 'present.' Most of the electorate is not going to know what that means."
If THAT is not conceding to willfully pulling the wool over your constituents eyes exactly WHAT does it mean?

"What it did," she continued, "was give cover to moderate Democrats who wanted to vote with us but were afraid to do so" because of how their votes would be used against them electorally. "A 'present' vote would protect them. Your senator voted 'present.' Most of the electorate is not going to know what that means."

[Lurking Dem]

24. Understanding strategy can be helpful.

But, contrary to Solomon's suggestion, while Obama voted "present," he reportedly did not "decline[]" to take a position on the legislation -- rather, his "present" votes were part of a strategy he had worked out with the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council in an effort to defeat the bill, according to the Council's CEO, Pam Sutherland. As ABCNews.com reported on July 17, Obama voted "present" on the two parental notification bills in 2001 "with the explicit support of the president and CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council." The Chicago Sun-Times further reported on December 4 that the "goal" of the strategy was "to entice moderate Republicans and Democrats to also vote present, helping to defeat the bills."

[desi]

25. However...

A simple, ethical no vote, would have definitely defeated the bills without the semantics and appearance of fooling the electorate into believing that a "present" vote equals a NAY vote which it does NOT. A hypothetical: What if legislation passed by a single vote and it was Obama's present vote that allowed said legislation to become law?

[Nailzberg]

26. Your hypothetical is impossible

Senate Rule 5-1(f)
No bill shall be passed by the Senate except on a roll call vote of a majority of those elected.

There are 59 members. Thirty Yea votes are required for passage on bills.

That does not change if people are absent or if members vote present, because it "Majority of those elected" is defined in Senate Rule 1-12 as an absolute majority of the total number of Senators entitled to be elected to the Senate, irrespective of the number of elected or appointed Senators actually serving in office. So long as 59 Senators are entitled to be elected to the Senate, "majority of those elected" shall mean 30 affirmative votes.

[desi]

29. Are you saying that no legislation passes or is defeated

unless said legislation has at least 30 yay or Nay votes?

edited for clarity.

[Nailzberg]

30. 30 votes needed for passage.

Whatever the combination of Present, Nay, or absent, the bill does not pass without 30 Y, the majority of those elected.

[desi]

33. I'm not familiar with IL statutes...

So I take it that a quorum is inconsequential as to enacting laws in IL, correct?

Further how about proposed legislation where the outcome of passage/defeat is not in question?

Among those, Mr. Obama did not vote yes or no on a bill that would allow certain victims of sexual crimes to petition judges to seal court records relating to their cases. He also voted present on a bill to impose stricter standards for evidence a judge is permitted to consider in imposing a criminal sentence.

On the sex crime bill, Mr. Obama cast the lone present vote in a 58-to-0 vote.

Mr. Obama’s campaign said he believed that the bill violated the First Amendment. The bill passed 112-0-0 in the House and 58-0-1 in the Senate.

<If Obama deemed the bill unconstitutional why not a Nay vote? Has this law been overturned on appeal, if you know?>

In 2000, Mr. Obama was one of two senators who voted present on a bill on whether facts not presented to a jury could later be the basis for increasing an offender’s sentence beyond the ordinary maximum.

State Representative Jim Durkin, a Republican who was a co-sponsor of the bill, said it was intended to bring state law in line with a United States Supreme Court decision that nullified a practice of introducing new evidence to a judge in the sentencing phase of the trial, after a jury conviction on other charges.

The bill sailed through both chambers. Out of 174 votes cast in the House and Senate, two were against and two were present, including Mr. Obama’s.

[Lurking Dem]

27. Not what was going on.

"The present votes Obama took at that time, along with many other pro-choice legislators, were 'no' votes to bad bills being used for political gain. We asked Senator Obama and other strong supporters of choice to vote present to encourage Senators facing tough re-elections to make the right choice by voting present, instead of caving to political pressure and voting for these bad bills. In the Illinois State Senate, Obama showed leadership, compassion and a true commitment to reproductive health care. The Republican Senate President at the time constantly used anti-abortion bills to pigeon-hole Democrats so that he could target them with misleading mailers during campaign season. It was a tactic that was about politics, not policy - and Obama didn't let them get away with it." Pam Sutherland, President & CEO of Illinois Planned Parenthood Council

"Anyone who says that a `present' vote necessarily reflects that someone is ducking an issue doesn't understand the first thing about legislative strategy," said Pam Sutherland, Planned Parenthood's chief lobbyist in Springfield. "People who work down here and know how things get done are hearing these accusations and saying, `huh?'"

...

Sutherland just laughs. "We also had Emil Jones, Lisa Madigan, Miguel del Valle, Rickey Hendon and other very strong pro-choice legislators voting `present' on that one," she said. "It was all done to pull `present' votes off the fence."

Obama confirmed Sutherland's account of the legislative strategy and said, "No one was more active to beat back those bills than I was."

"Criticizing Obama on the basis of `present' votes indicates you don't have a great understanding of the process," said Thom Mannard, director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence.

In practical terms, a "present" vote is as good as a "no" vote because the law requires a bill to win the votes of a majority of the lawmakers in either body, not simply a majority of those voting.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/20/101819/09/539/424577

[BigDDem]

21. Uh, I think I have an opinion on this....

"Present"

[zulchzulu]

23. 136 times voting "Present" out of 4,000+ votes = 0.34% (Is that "Often"?)

Actually, despite the very misleading headline, the article is an excellent primer on how you vote "present" on some votes that you would otherwise vote for or against except for strategic reasons or to not vote for a "poison pill" in a bill.

Do you vote against a child healthcare bill where some Repug added a sneaky anti-abortion portion to the bill and get told that you "voted against kids"? No. You vote "present" on that bill and take the Repug shit out of the bill.

As the article finally surmises, Obama used the "present" vote very intelligently and with respect for constitutional legalities.

The small print taketh what the big print giveth away.

[flpoljunkie]

28. Thanks for giving us the truth, zulchzulu. Some folks here will try anything hoping it will stick.

[Adelante]

31. CapitolFax Blog today

* The Tribune had this bit today on Hillary Clinton’s latest attack on Barack Obama…

<Clinton> also raised a new front on the issue of Obama’s use of “present” votes — rather than “yes” and “no” votes — on legislation when he was in the Illinois Senate, including on measures that dealt with Republican-led efforts to restrict abortion rights. <…>

Obama has defended his “present” votes on abortion-related bills in the Illinois legislature, contending it was part of a strategy fashioned with abortion-rights advocates to help give some Illinois Senate Democrats political cover and to avoid looking harsh by casting “no” votes that would create a re-election risk.

But the Tribune earlier this year found few lawmakers remembered such a strategy and many of those who joined with Obama to vote present were, like him, in politically safe districts.

* Maybe only a few members the Tribune contacted remember this ploy, but I do. It was specifically designed by Planned Parenthood to counter Republican Senate President Pate Philip’s barrage of hot-button abortion bills that he was continually trying to ram through the Senate in 2001 and 2002. The Tribune missed the point - and by not contacting the groups involved, flubbed the story.

Besides passing bills he supported, Pate’s idea was to cause a controversy by splitting “moderate” Democrats away from the abortion rights groups, thereby causing a rift on that side, and, more imporantly, to put some political targets on the hot seat. So, as they also did in the House a few years back, Planned Parenthood was encouraging “Present” votes by some of their more loyal members in order to encourage the moderates to vote that way as well.

Entire article:

http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2007/12/04/about-those-present-votes/

[sniffa]

32. 3%