Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI) is facing a dilemma, whether to stand on his principles or to vote with his party. Politicians of both parties regularly face these kind of issues, but they’re usually well hidden from public view – allowing those who
tow toe the party line to avoid the spotlight. Feingold is in a much more visible bind. He is on record (repeatedly) proclaiming that his view that a president should be able to choose their associates (except in extreme cases) is the reason he votes to confirm Bush appointees. Feingold expressed that view when he voted for Condoleezza Rice in January and in 2001, when he was the only Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democrat to vote for John Bolton’s nomination to be undersecretary of State.
Democratic sources say Feingold is reconsidering his past position, and they expect him to vote against Bolton when his nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations comes before committee next week. Feingold’s aides say only that he “is going to be reserving judgment until he hears from the nominee at the hearing.”
Perhaps Senate Democrats are trying to publicly shame Feingold into a party line vote?
Democrats solidly against U.N. ambassador pick [HoustonChronicle.com]