Analysis of Senate voting behavior on Supreme Court nominations, 1969-1970 : a study of party membership, sectional representation and ideology.

Since taking office in January 1969, President Richard Nixon has nominated four men for the Supreme Court. However, only two nominees were approved by the Senate; two were rejected. The purpose of this research was to attempt an explanation of this phenomenon of Senate behavior. The introductory chapter presents a brief survey of past Supreme Court nominations in order to acquaint the reader with the intricate processes of selecting Supreme Court justices. This introduction also contains a section in which theories of legislative voting behavior are presented. These theories are examined in hopes of promoting the reader's understanding of Senate behavior in general. The next four chapters deal more specifically with explaining senatorial voting behavior on the 1969-1970 Supreme Court nomii1ations of President Nixon: Warren E. Burger, Clement Haynsworth, G. Harrold Carswell and Harry A. Blackmun. Methods of roll-call analysis are utilized to examine Senate voting on these nominations. Roll-call votes on the four Nixon nominees are scaled by the Guttman technique to discern patterns of voting behavior. Several statistical tests were then used to attempt to establish an association between voting behavior and certain variables. The scalogram of senatorial votes on the four nominations reveals three distinct patterns of behavior. A large group of senators demonstrated consistent support for all four nominees. Another smaller group supported three nominees while opposing one. A third group consistently opposed two while supporting two nominations of President Nixon. Further statistical analysis revealed that certain variables exerted significant influence on this voting behavior. On two nominations, Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell, chi-square computations demonstrate that two varia les exerted a significant influence on the voting behavior of senators in the 91st Congress: party membership and sectional representation. Further statistical analysis shows sectional representation to have been the more significant determinant of voting behavior on the Haynsworth nomination. Party membership was shown to be slightly more of an influential factor on the Senate vote taken on the Carswell nomination. A third variable, ideology of individual senators, was also shown to be significantly associated with their voting behavior. Computations of the Pearson r product moment correlation coefficient reveals a significant relationship between votes and "conservatism" and "liberalism." Conservative senators, as determined by an index of the Americans for Constitutional Action, demonstrated consistent support for two nominees, Haynsworth and Carswell. Liberal senators, as indicated by the Americans for Democratic Action index, opposed Haynsworth and Carswell. Scaling methods often associated with roll-call analysis were not applicable to Senate voting behavior on the nominations of Harry Blackmun and Warren Burger because of the near unanimity of the voting. Furthermore, the absence of dichotomous voting precluded many adjunct statistical tests. Therefore, none of the variables influencing Senate bei1avior on the Haynsworth and Carswell votes were detected on the Blackmun and Burger votes. The fact that certain influences were shown to have affected Senate voting on the Haynsworth and Carswell nominations but were not apparently influential on the Burger and Blackmun votes may have some significance. However, limited descriptive analysis revealed the presence of other subjective factors in Senate deliberations of the Supreme Court nominations of President Nixon. Such considerations as personal integrity, judicial competence, scholarship and social attitudes entered Senate debate over these nominations. Furthermore, labor and civil rights groups lobbied extensively against the confirmation of both Clement Haynsworth and G. Harrold Carswell. The impact of these additional factors on Senate deliberation and voting were not measured or analyzed in this paper. The scope of the study was limited to an analysis of three variables: party membership, sectional representation and ideology. While no claim is made that these were the only determinants of Senate behavior, they were shown to be significant influences on the Senate votes taken on the Haynsworth and Carswell nominations. Methods of roll-call analysis have been demonstrated to be applicable to a study of Senate voting on Supreme Court nominations. Similar studies would show that further use of these empirical methods can contribute to greater understanding of the selection of Supreme Court justices. Furthermore, more statistical analysis of voting would yield greater predictability of senatorial behavior on public issues.

Name thesis:degree_name

M.A.

Level thesis:degree_level

Masters

Grantor

Baylor University.

Year dc:date.issued

1970

Author dc:creator

• Croce, Lenny L., 1947-

Advisor dc:contributor.advisor

• Miller, Robert T. (Robert Thomas), 1920-1996.

• United States Congress.
• United States Senate.
• United States Supreme Court.

Statement dc:rights

• Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission.

Language dc:language.iso

en

Handle dc:identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/2104/13251

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/13251