Corwin: From everything I've read his wealth had nothing to do with the consistency of his efforts. There are many members of the House and Senate that are probably as wealthy or wealthier. They come from both sides of the aisle. His consistency, reportedly, from what I read, came from the fact that the probability of his being reelected was never in question. I guess he must have had 7 elections to the Senate. Only once was it ever in question. That certainty enabled him to be consistent in his actions, never fearing for being defeated in an election. That is not a situation that is available to virtually any other Senator. Here is an interesting factoid. Although he was probably the most consistently Liberal of Senators over a long period of time, earlier this year he was voted MOST BIPARTISAN by Republican Senators in a poll by THE HILL magazine. He had a long history of crafting legislation with members of the opposite party. That included joining with President Bush on initially pushing through the No Child Left Behind education legislation. He did this while taking heat from Liberal organizations. He also veered later to disagree with President Bush on how it was implemented and funded. In this period there are many stories of his personal traits and characteristics. There are many stories from the famous and non famous how he reached out to people. It is the mark of a human how they extend themselves to others. A short while ago the Conservative reporter, Robert Novak died, also of brain cancer. Similarly upon his death, and despite his political leanings there were similar stories of how he reached out to people of all political persuasions and had many friends across parties. May both of these people RIP.
"The Kennedy name is synonymous with the Democratic Party, and at times Ted was the target of partisan campaign attacks.