Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kennedy Successor to Be Chosen by Special Election
ap ^ | August 26, 2009 | staff

Posted on 08/26/2009 5:33:31 AM PDT by kellynla

Unlike most states, a successor to fill Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's seat in the Senate will be chosen through a special election, not by the governor.

Massachusetts law requires a special election for the seat no sooner than 145 days and no later than 160 days after a vacancy occurs. The law bans an interim appointee.

The law was changed in 2004, when Sen. John Kerry, a Democrat, became his party's presidential nominee and Republican Mitt Romney was the state's governor. Before the change, the governor would have appointed a replacement to serve until the next general election.

That would have created the opportunity for Romney to install a fellow Republican in office, a move that Democrats who control the state legislature sought to prevent.

Last week, Kennedy asked Massachusetts lawmakers to change state law to give Massachusetts' current governor, Deval Patrick, a fellow supporter of President Barack Obama, the ability to appoint an interim replacement to Kennedy's seat should Kennedy be unable to continue serving.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: election; kennedy; maryjokopechne; senate; swimmerbuysit
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 last
To: April Lexington

Given the stupidity of Mass. voters we know full well that another leftist dem will be elected. But at least they will be offered the perfunctory ability to VOTE! This is something Teddy wanted to refuse his “beloved constituents”, demanding that little Deval be allowed to override voting rights and just install another Kennedy! A thug to the end, Teddy.


81 posted on 08/26/2009 8:01:57 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

“In Massachusetts you have to be a resident for at least one year to run for senator.”


States can require that someone have resided in the state for X years prior to running for a state office, but states can’t do squat about persons running for the U.S. House or Senate. Article I of the U.S. Constitution merely provides that Senators and Representatives must be inhabitants of the state at the time of their election, and the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that no state may impose additional qualifications for Senators and Representatives than those in the Constitution (which is why states can impose term limits on state legislators and officials but not on U.S. Senators or Representatives).

That being said, Mitt Romney is not going to move back to Mass. to make a long-shot bid for the U.S. Senate. If Romney didn’t even run for reelection as governor in 2006 because he thought he would likely lose (and, even worse for someone that wanted to run for Ppresident as a Republican, not be able to reinvent himself as a “conservative” and simultaneously face the Mass. electorate), he won’t run for the Senate now.

Do you think that Peter Blute could make a run? I can’t think of any other moderate-to-conservative Republicans that could run a competitive statewide race.


82 posted on 08/26/2009 8:46:00 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (Fred Thompson appears human-sized because he is actually standing a million miles away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Salamander
Every time I read it, I hum a certain Frank Zappa tune in my head...

Me too. And it blinded me. Tem po ra ri leeeee... Now, the fur trapper, who was strictly from commercial...

Sorry. Where was I? They'll change the law, of course. Mostly because they're terrified of losing a Dem vote in the Senate and at least partially because they can. Watch it happen.

83 posted on 08/26/2009 8:54:23 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I love the fact that the Democrats own chicanery smacked them in the ass, just in time to vote on health care when 60 votes could be needed. Maybe this is what Feingold meant when he said there would be no Senate vote on health care until after Christmas. Massachussetts has to vote in their new socialist to take Teddy’s place.

Of course, if he had done the right thing and resigned his seat back when he was diagnosed, the whole spectacle could have been avoided.


84 posted on 08/26/2009 9:02:01 AM PDT by OrangeHoof (YES WE CAN have a Depression.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof

bttt


85 posted on 08/26/2009 9:03:48 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof
“I love the fact that the Democrats own chicanery smacked them in the ass, just in time to vote on health care when 60 votes could be needed.”

God works in strange ways.

And that old fart in WV couldn't be far behind Teddy.

I still believe Obamacare is D.O.A. in the Senate...
if it makes it that far.

If Americans wanted socialized medicine they’d move to Canada, the UK or Europe...hint...hint...hint!

And the demise of Obamacare will be Hussein’s “Waterloo”.

Now about that Birth Certificate...

86 posted on 08/26/2009 9:21:42 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: AuH2ORepublican
Peter Blute may run, he mostly just does a radio show out in the Worcester area and is really not seen (or heard) much in the eastern part of the state anymore. Not good since the bulk of the voters are in the eastern part of the state.

An open senate seat will attract republicans it will just have to take time to see who.

87 posted on 08/26/2009 9:27:59 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

Well since you live there, you should know...
there isn’t really much chance of an “R” winning...is there?


88 posted on 08/26/2009 9:36:09 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Lynch is pro-life. Other than that, he is, as they would say in his own nabe, “re-TAHH-ded.”


89 posted on 08/26/2009 9:38:33 AM PDT by Clemenza (Remember our Korean War Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
A prominent Republican needs to announce his candidacy for the seat NOW, so if the Democrats try to play games once the process is in motion the Republicans can claim that the Democrats are stealing the seat, and that the're really NOT for Democracy.

-PJ

90 posted on 08/26/2009 9:42:49 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (This just in... Voting Republican is a Terrorist act!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
There is always a chance.
91 posted on 08/26/2009 9:51:03 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

“There is always a chance.”

But the odds are pretty long aren’t they?

Which “R” would have the best chance of winning?


92 posted on 08/26/2009 10:09:31 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

LOL They waited just a little too long to try to change the laws and even passing it now would not allow it to be retroactive.


93 posted on 08/26/2009 10:23:58 AM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chris_bdba

I don’t know...I am certainly not any authority on MA politics but I would think the best we can hope for is a Pro-Life and/or Blue Dog Democrat...


94 posted on 08/26/2009 10:32:42 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

It is hard to say and it really depends on who the challengers are and if there will be an independant running. We had 16 years of republican governors and it looking like we will have another one in there again.

The democrat leadership in this state has swung far left recently so I’m assuming that nominee would be of the Barney Frank type. If this is the case and the Republicans can run a normal human being than yes they can win the seat. I’ll give the odds of a Republican winning the seat right now at about 35%. Not good but not bad either.


95 posted on 08/26/2009 10:38:22 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
It looks like they still could change the law.

Or just ignore it, like they do the rest of the laws in our country.

96 posted on 08/26/2009 10:44:32 AM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Where's this tagline thing everyone keeps talking about?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2325024/posts


97 posted on 08/26/2009 12:05:54 PM PDT by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: April Lexington
HA! Hoisted on their own petard!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2325024/posts

98 posted on 08/26/2009 12:09:23 PM PDT by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson