8/15/00 11:55 a.m.
Flip-Flop Joe
Lieberman played games with his Clarence Thomas vote.

By Melissa Seckora, NR editorial associate

oe Lieberman is called the "conscience of the Senate," but that may not have stopped him from old-fashioned political gamesmanship in one of the most important Senate votes of the 1990s — the confirmation of Clarence Thomas.

Lieberman ended up voting against Thomas, but Bush administration lobbyists say they were told at the time that the Connecticut senator was willing instead to vote "yes" if his vote would make the difference in whether Thomas would get confirmed.

"My recollection on the day of the vote is that Lieberman told us that his daughter and wife were very upset that he was going to vote to confirm then Judge Thomas," says a former Bush administration official who was involved in the confirmation process.

"As a result," the former official says, "he said he was going to vote against Thomas unless his vote was needed to confirm Thomas. As reflected in the roll-call vote, Lieberman waited until after we had 50 votes to vote 'no.'"

Former Lieberman staff deny that the Connecticut senator played an insider's game with his vote. "There was no hip-pocket vote on that. Absolutely not," says his former chief of staff Michael Lewan.

What isn't in dispute is that Lieberman held ever-shifting positions throughout the Thomas controversy.

Initially, Lieberman said he was impressed by Judge Thomas's "strength of character, independence of mind, and intellect generally."

"His academic and professional achievements are testimony to his appreciation for the value of hard work and determination — qualities that, in my mind, are too often overlooked," Lieberman gushed. "Indeed, his entire life is an inspiring example of what an individual who has faith, ability, and a desire to work can achieve in this country, even in the face of the worst kinds of prejudice and adversity. As he himself has said, 'Only in America.'"

Then came Anita Hill's allegations of sexual harassment. Upon receiving word of what he called these "supposed" charges, Lieberman needed to take time to make a "calm and reasonable judgment," and requested a "reasonable" delay out of fairness to Thomas. Lieberman wanted to treat "this individual, this man, this nominee, justly."

After reading the FBI file presented to him, Lieberman consulted with friends, co-workers, associates, and other women who worked with Judge Thomas during his time at the EEOC and the Department of Education. To Lieberman's delight there was universal support and a "clear indication by all of the women [he] spoke to that there was never, certainly not, a case of sexual harassment, and not even a hint of impropriety."

Senator Jack Danforth, in his book Resurrection, recalled October 8, 1991, the day originally set for the Thomas vote. "When I walked to the Senate floor, where Lieberman was presiding, I asked his views. Joe still expected to vote for confirmation but thought the vote should be delayed."

According to an October 15, 1991 report in the Hartford Courant, Lieberman originally said he was backing Thomas, yet was disturbed by the sexual-harassment charges. After asking for a delay, Lieberman said he was "not withdrawing that support," but as the Courant notes, he "left open the possibility of a change in his position."

The Courant reported that Lieberman had conversations with his wife, Hadassah, and his 22-year-old daughter, Rebecca, who he said was "very deeply opposed, very emotional." Lieberman said, "she worried about the message we would give women if we voted to confirm. I worry about that too." Referring to Hill's testimony, Lieberman said, "If I concluded that she was telling the truth, I don't believe that I could vote for Judge Thomas."

Finally, Lieberman had to choose — but he did so very gingerly.

"[He] waited until moments before the vote and made no floor statement," wrote the Courant the day after the October 15 vote. "University of Oklahoma law professor Anita Hill's allegations gnawed at him . . . and five minutes before the vote, an hour after that 50th senator made it clear Thomas would win, Lieberman said he would vote no."

It's clear that Lieberman wrestled with his conscience on the Thomas vote. It's just that in this particular contest, his conscience may have lost.