More important than who is going to win the special elections I have talked about in this blog is what they signify. Special elections are not exactly common, but with the high profile battle right now in Congress we all know how important Senators are. I believe it is very important not to just hand over the power to appoint Senators to Governors or state legislatures.
The idea of appointing someone with no political aspirations is attractive, but I’m not sure it is realistic. You cannot really stop someone from running. It would also mean the appointer is giving up an opportunity to help their party. In the end it seems I like the idea, but realize that it cannot be a law.
I think the word interim should always be mention with appointed Senators. People, I believe, often forget that appointed Senators were not elected. I feel sticking the word interim in their title will negate some of the incumbency advantage in holding the seat. Special elections should also be had as soon as reasonably possible. There should still be primaries, and time for military and absentee voters to vote. Having the election sooner though will stress it is not a normal election with a normal incumbent.
I, like most, want each Senator to be a representation of their state. The only way to do this is with fair elections. It is probably true that there is no such thing as a fair election, but we should still try to have them. I hope the right people are elected in 2010 and for the right reasons.
Just for fun my predictions for the elections I talked about are NY – Gillibrand, MA – Coakley, DE – Castle, and CO – Norton.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Out Came the Challengers
I have talked about how Senator Gillibrand will likely not face serious opposition in the upcoming New York special election for Senate. There is one appointee though that is attracting a lot of challengers. That would be the current junior Senator from Colorado, Michael Bennet. Bennet has announced he will seek election in 2010 which will be his first state wide election. Previously Bennet was superintendent of Colorado public schools before being appointed Senator by Governor Bill Ritter. He does not exactly have the résumé that scares away potential challengers.
Senator Bennet is going to see a quality challenger in the primary and if he is lucky in the general election. Andrew Romanoff, a democrat, is the former Colorado Speaker of the House and Jane Norton, a Republican, former Colorado Lieutenant Governor may spell trouble for the inexperienced Bennet. Senator Bennet of course still has the incumbency advantage, which usually means money. Some of the money he raises will most likely need to be spent on the primary.
Senator Bennet would have no chance in this race if not for his appointment so he is lucky in that respect. Republicans would probably consider themselves lucky to that such an inexperienced appointee is seeking election. When it comes to Senator Bennet’s seat the wolves are out.
Source: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13815796?IADID
Senator Bennet is going to see a quality challenger in the primary and if he is lucky in the general election. Andrew Romanoff, a democrat, is the former Colorado Speaker of the House and Jane Norton, a Republican, former Colorado Lieutenant Governor may spell trouble for the inexperienced Bennet. Senator Bennet of course still has the incumbency advantage, which usually means money. Some of the money he raises will most likely need to be spent on the primary.
Senator Bennet would have no chance in this race if not for his appointment so he is lucky in that respect. Republicans would probably consider themselves lucky to that such an inexperienced appointee is seeking election. When it comes to Senator Bennet’s seat the wolves are out.
Source: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13815796?IADID
Messy Primaries
I believe most people would admit primaries are an important part of the election process, especially in finding someone who truly represents their constituency. I have already mentioned that Senator Gillibrand of New York will most likely face little to no primary challenges from her party in an upcoming special election. The reason is not that her views are so much inline with the party or that no wants the seat. It is simply the White House wants to avoid a “messy primary”.
Obviously I understand that winning the seat is the most important thing to the Democrats, but what about the people of New York. Democratic voters deserve a choice and President Obama really seems to be standing in the way of that. Steve Isreal, a congressman from Long Island, said in a statement “I spoke with President Obama today. He asked me that I not run for the U.S. Senate this year”. It is President Obama’s prerogative to establish himself as a party leader and if he want to campaign for Gillibrand then fine. Asking people to not challenge her though seems to be too far though. It shows that the White House is both afraid of losing a seat in a Democratic stronghold and that New Yorkers may not be fully behind the appointment of Senator Gillibrand.
Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0509/Obama_clears_field_for_Gillibrand_in_New_York.html
Obviously I understand that winning the seat is the most important thing to the Democrats, but what about the people of New York. Democratic voters deserve a choice and President Obama really seems to be standing in the way of that. Steve Isreal, a congressman from Long Island, said in a statement “I spoke with President Obama today. He asked me that I not run for the U.S. Senate this year”. It is President Obama’s prerogative to establish himself as a party leader and if he want to campaign for Gillibrand then fine. Asking people to not challenge her though seems to be too far though. It shows that the White House is both afraid of losing a seat in a Democratic stronghold and that New Yorkers may not be fully behind the appointment of Senator Gillibrand.
Source: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0509/Obama_clears_field_for_Gillibrand_in_New_York.html
Like Father Like Son?
Beau Biden was not really an option for outgoing Governor Ruth Ann Minner to fill his father Joe’s Delaware Senate seat as. The reason was Beau was preparing to deploy to Iraq as a member of the Delaware National Guard. Beau though is expected to try to win the seat in the upcoming special election. The appointee, Ted Kaufman, has said he does not plan on running for re-election. Young Biden though would have a very though challenge as the GOP has its sights on the seat vacated by the Vice President.
Mike Castle is what you would call a “quality challenger”. He was a two term governor in Delaware and currently represents the state in the House. Of course Rep. Castle is not a challenger. The seat will be vacated, but that sometimes seems murky due to the most likely Democratic candidate having the same last name (and genes) as the former Senator. Castle would seem like a slam dunk since Biden has only said he is considering running. Castle is extremely popular as seen in the fact he has dominated elections in Delaware for a long time. After Beau gave that moving speech at the DNC it seemed like it was Beau’s seat to lose. With the state of the nation as it is with the Democrats in power though I think Castle saw his chance despite his advanced age of seventy. I am hoping we get a good youth vs. experience election personally.
Source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/10/biden-v-castle.html
Mike Castle is what you would call a “quality challenger”. He was a two term governor in Delaware and currently represents the state in the House. Of course Rep. Castle is not a challenger. The seat will be vacated, but that sometimes seems murky due to the most likely Democratic candidate having the same last name (and genes) as the former Senator. Castle would seem like a slam dunk since Biden has only said he is considering running. Castle is extremely popular as seen in the fact he has dominated elections in Delaware for a long time. After Beau gave that moving speech at the DNC it seemed like it was Beau’s seat to lose. With the state of the nation as it is with the Democrats in power though I think Castle saw his chance despite his advanced age of seventy. I am hoping we get a good youth vs. experience election personally.
Source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/10/biden-v-castle.html
Kennedy's Wish
When Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy passed away current Massachusetts’ law said that a special election must be held to fill the Senator's vacant seat. That meant that Governor Deval Patrick did not have the ability to appoint an interim Senator. Now while that seems fair, the Democrats were one seat short of a sixty seat filibuster proof majority. So legislation was pushed through that allowed Governor Patrick to appoint Paul G. Kirk on September 24 of this year.
I am sure Democrats even felt a little wary of appointing someone to fill the seat Senator Kennedy had held for so long. I have mentioned already on this blog that appointments give the appointee too much of an advantage in special elections. It also would be unfair though for the Democrats to not have an advantage in the Senate they earned. Senator Kennedy in his declining health said in a letter to state leaders to change the law so Massachusetts was properly represented should he pass away. He also made sure to call for a candidate who would not run in the upcoming election so there would be a level playing field.
I applaud Governor Patrick for listening to the late Senator and choosing someone who had no ambitions to run in the special elections. What would have happened though if that seat was not safely in the democratic camp? He probably would have been more likely to pick a candidate to give them an advantage over the GOP. In the end Massachusetts gets to pick their representative which is what they deserve.
Sources: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58N3RF20090924
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN20513156
I am sure Democrats even felt a little wary of appointing someone to fill the seat Senator Kennedy had held for so long. I have mentioned already on this blog that appointments give the appointee too much of an advantage in special elections. It also would be unfair though for the Democrats to not have an advantage in the Senate they earned. Senator Kennedy in his declining health said in a letter to state leaders to change the law so Massachusetts was properly represented should he pass away. He also made sure to call for a candidate who would not run in the upcoming election so there would be a level playing field.
I applaud Governor Patrick for listening to the late Senator and choosing someone who had no ambitions to run in the special elections. What would have happened though if that seat was not safely in the democratic camp? He probably would have been more likely to pick a candidate to give them an advantage over the GOP. In the end Massachusetts gets to pick their representative which is what they deserve.
Sources: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58N3RF20090924
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN20513156
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Gillibrand Question
Senator Gillibrand is one half of the representation right now for the State of New York in the United States Senate. Her views though are probably not in line with the majority of one of the biggest democratic strongholds in the country. Senator Gillibrand appears to be a centrist who has been supported by the National Rifle Association and as a lawyer worked for Phillip Morris. These issues alone would make her a long shot to beat most New York City liberals.
She will likely now though see little primary challenge due to the Democratic Party not wanting to lose the seat to a Republican such as former New York Governor Pataki. So now Senator Gillibrand has the possibility to represent the State of New York for a very long time and it really has nothing to do with her views being in line with the State’s. She Governor Patterson probably felt pressure to pick a female from Upstate New York, especially since he will also need support in 2010 to keep his position as Governor.
One vote in the Senate is a very big deal so for person to have one for an extended period of time due to her selection by a governor who was also not elected to his office does not make much sense. It is entirely possible Senator Gillibrand will move more toward the left and represent New York well, but that does not change the fact that the way she received the position does not seem fair.
Source: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/kirsten_gillibrand/index.html?inline=nyt-per
She will likely now though see little primary challenge due to the Democratic Party not wanting to lose the seat to a Republican such as former New York Governor Pataki. So now Senator Gillibrand has the possibility to represent the State of New York for a very long time and it really has nothing to do with her views being in line with the State’s. She Governor Patterson probably felt pressure to pick a female from Upstate New York, especially since he will also need support in 2010 to keep his position as Governor.
One vote in the Senate is a very big deal so for person to have one for an extended period of time due to her selection by a governor who was also not elected to his office does not make much sense. It is entirely possible Senator Gillibrand will move more toward the left and represent New York well, but that does not change the fact that the way she received the position does not seem fair.
Source: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/kirsten_gillibrand/index.html?inline=nyt-per
A Problem with Picking Interim U.S. Senators
The procedure for how a vacancy in the United States Senate is filled differs from State to State. That is because Articles I, section III of the United States Constitution which was amended by the seventeenth amendment says
“When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided that the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”
So what happens is that the legislature of a particular State has the ability to give the power to the Governor to pick an interim Senator and also to issue a writ of election for when the election should take place. In most states the governor has the ability to pick an interim Senator. I believe this practice raises a big problem.
A governor is going to pick someone to fill the seat that can either help them in the future, or help their party in the future. The people will have the say when it comes to finishing out the term, or in the following election for the full six year term, but the interim Senator would have an advantage over challengers in the special election due to their status as incumbent. It is true that governors are elected, but in the future I will go into a non elected governor appointing someone to the Senate. It is also true that people elect Governors for much different reasons than Senators.
In the end the people should have the most power in deciding who represents them in Congress. Letting the State Legislature or the Governor decide how things will play out is not representative. I believe all states should have special elections to decide the nest person to hold the seat. They should be held quickly so the public can have the amount of representation given to them in the Constitution. I will look at some special elections coming up for vacant Senate seats.
Source: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Vacancies.pdf
“When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided that the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”
So what happens is that the legislature of a particular State has the ability to give the power to the Governor to pick an interim Senator and also to issue a writ of election for when the election should take place. In most states the governor has the ability to pick an interim Senator. I believe this practice raises a big problem.
A governor is going to pick someone to fill the seat that can either help them in the future, or help their party in the future. The people will have the say when it comes to finishing out the term, or in the following election for the full six year term, but the interim Senator would have an advantage over challengers in the special election due to their status as incumbent. It is true that governors are elected, but in the future I will go into a non elected governor appointing someone to the Senate. It is also true that people elect Governors for much different reasons than Senators.
In the end the people should have the most power in deciding who represents them in Congress. Letting the State Legislature or the Governor decide how things will play out is not representative. I believe all states should have special elections to decide the nest person to hold the seat. They should be held quickly so the public can have the amount of representation given to them in the Constitution. I will look at some special elections coming up for vacant Senate seats.
Source: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Vacancies.pdf
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)