Charlie Rangel Censure Vote and Race

The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted to censure the corrupt Democrat Charlie Rangel.

This was truly a bipartisan vote, not along party lines.

Here's the roll call.

The 333-79 roll call Thursday by which the House voted to censure Rep. Charles Rangel of New York for ethics and fundraising violations.

A "yes" vote is a vote in favor of censure.

Voting yes were 170 Democrats and 163 Republicans.

Voting no were 77 Democrats and 2 Republicans.

What erased the usual divide?

Race.

Race figured prominently in how representatives voted.

Smart Politics offers an analysis.

The U.S House vote on Thursday afternoon to censure longtime Harlem U.S. Representative Charlie Rangel (NY-15) for 11 ethics violations was noteworthy not simply because it is an infrequently used hammer in the lower chamber.

Although all but two of the 79 members who voted against censure were members of the Democratic Party, the 333-79 vote revealed much less about partisan politics and much more about race.

A Smart Politics analysis of the H.R. 1737 roll call vote finds that just 25 percent of racial minorities voted for Rangel's censure (18 of 71 voting representatives) compared to 92 percent of whites (315 of 341).

Black members of the House voted nearly unanimously against the resolution with outgoing member Artur Davis (AL-07) the lone vote in favor of censuring the congressman from New York.

In total, 36 of 37 voting African-American members of the House voted against censure, or 97 percent - including Rangel, who also cast a 'nay' vote in his defense.

...A majority of Hispanic and Latino American representatives were also opposed to censuring Rangel, with just 11 of 25 voting 'yea,' or 44 percent.

...Overall, 92 percent of white representatives voted to censure the Harlem congressman - 315 of 341 voting members - with little difference between Democrats and Republicans.

All but two white Republicans (Peter King, NY-03, and Don Young, AK-AL) voted to censure Rangel, or 156 of 158 voting members (99 percent).

Meanwhile, a nearly equal percentage of white Democrats, 87 percent (159 of 183 representatives), also voted for the censure resolution.

Smart Politics has compiled a table, Charlie Rangel U.S. House Censure Vote by Race.

There's absolutely no denying that race was a determining factor in how members of the House voted.

Wisconsin's Gwen Moore, Democrat, voted against censure, the only member of the Wisconsin delegation to do so. Of Wisconsin's eight representatives, Moore is the only non-white.

Rather than just admitting the obvious racial influence seen in the vote, we get a bit of a different spin from Isthmus: The Daily Page.

Today the House of Representatives made history by voting to censure Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) in light of a variety of ethics and disclosure violations, tax evasion, and a number of other actions that would suggest the guy believes bribery is a legitimate part of constituent relations.

The vote tally shows how issues as grand as ethics don't overcome the importance of constituency in Congressional politics.

If "the importance of constituency" is code to mean the "importance of race," then I guess that analysis can be seen as valid.

This was not a colorblind vote.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, the content of one's character is less important than the color of one's skin.

That's not good.