He also is one of the most consistent "good guys" on votes - the only two (which are big) where I have a problem with him are the "torture" bill and the cluster bomb bill. On the former I was at a NJ Democratic event where someone informally asked him why and his answer was evasive - pointing to the ports bill later that night and saying something about promises not being kept on it. I didn't get if there was a relationship or if he was changing the subject and wanting to speak instead of how the Port of Newark (where there are oil refineries and chemical plants, commuter lines, tunnels to Manhattan all in a very densely populated area was not adequately handled (the same port security issue Kerry raised in 2004). Some also thought that he voted that way to give Menendez, who was up for re-election cover to also vote for it. (I remember how stunned I was when both NJ Senators, who had voted for K/F voted for it.
On the cluster bombs, I assume it was AIPAC and the fact that Israel just used them.
He seems to be a good friend to Kerry - at the Social Security road show that the Democrats had at Pace University in 2005 - where he and a man at least in his 70s stole the show in presenting why SS should not change, he was clearly still broken up that Kerry lost and said many very strong, kind things about Kerry as a person and the type of President he would have been. Given what we know about that time period, that affection and effusive affirmation likely meant a lot to Kerry. (Remember all the "behind the scenes" whispers that implied that Kerry was wrong to act as a Democratic leader and that Reid et all were mad at him. Or remember how he was treated with Kerry/Feingold (
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=93803&mesg_id=93873 and a later Beachmom comment.)
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Amendment (Kerry Amdt. No. 4442 )
Vote Number: 181 Vote Date: June 22, 2006, 11:07 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766
Statement of Purpose: To require the redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq in order to further a political solution in Iraq, encourage the people of Iraq to provide for their own security, and achieve victory in the war on terror.
Vote Counts: YEAs 13
NAYs 86
Not Voting 1
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---13
Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)Leahy (D-VT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Wyden (D-OR)
To me, this looks like Kerry backing someone who was there for him when it was the hardest in 2005 and 2006.
The NJ Democrats all had a unity event that Andrews conveniently skipped a few days before Andrews announced against him. I saw Andrews with lautenberg in 2006 for Menendez at a Democratic event. If I had to characterize him, think a NJ "John Edwards" without Edwards' better side (poverty etc). He was clearly a party favorite and likely would have been the "insider" candidate had Lautenberg decided not to run. He is generically "handsome" and and well spoken, but seemed a bit plastic. He was a co-sponsor of the IWR resolution and is (in WJC fashion lying about Lautenberg's position saying that Lautenberg ran in 2002 as if in favor of it. (caveat - I realize that this is a pretty negative statement based on very little.) The other opponent is a mayor of Morristown who is not that respected in Morristown - who was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat. He also spoke at an anti-immigration rally in town. He would be an embarrassment, if he were the candidate.)