On the recordOctober 2, 1998
As every southern Senator knows, Andrew Johnson came much closer to conviction on the charges of serious misconduct. Although Johnson's impeachment proceedings ostensibly focused on his disregarding the Tenure in Office Act, historians--and not a single southerner does not understand--but historians uniformly agree that the true sources of opposition to President Johnson were policy disagreements and personal animosity. The conflict this time was between Johnson's moderate post-Civil War policies toward the Southern States and the overwhelming Republican majorities in both Chambers. The Republicans feared dilution of their voting strength if the southerners were seated. Johnson's defenders in the Senate were eventually able to hold on to barely enough votes to prevent his conviction. In Professor Raoul Berger's view, ``Johnson's trial serves as a frightening reminder that in the hands of a passion-driven Congress, the process may bring down the very pillars of our constitutional system.'' Yet, if the cases of Tyler and Johnson substantiate the framers' fears, the Nixon situation vindicates the utility of the impeachment procedures. Notice how different the Nixon proceedings were from Tyler's and Johnson's. As the Nixon impeachment process unfolded, there was broad bipartisan consensus each step of the way. I was there at the time.…
Source
govinfo.gov




