Posted on 09/10/2009 7:19:43 AM PDT by AIM Freeper
As occurs more and more, voices are heard from Washington, D. C., within the 111th Congress and elsewhere, as to what States of the Union ought to do about a matter of State law. The instant discussion, including some Congressional proposals, concerns the filling of a United States Senatorial interim vacancy. It has become a subject for pundits and other commentators, historically informed and otherwise. The issue undoubtedly has attracted top attention inasmuch as a terminally ill United States Senator, while dying with dignity, nevertheless had the audacity to purport to advise his State what the law in the State ought to be.
From the founding on Constitution Day, September 17, 1789, until 1913, upon ratification of Amendment XVII to the Constitution, the Governor of the State in which a midterm vacancy occurred appointed a successor, the successor to serve ". . . until the next Meeting of the [State] Legislature . . ."
The 17th Amendment authorizes, and continues to authorize, the Governor so to appoint, subject to the power of the Legislature, following the otherwise applicable State law as to enactments, to require a special election. Thus, if State law so provides the gubernatorial appointment lasts until the special election rather than for the full balance of the unexpired six-year term.
The law varies considerably State by State. At the moment, for the obvious reason, Massachusetts law is at the focal forefront. Massachusetts has an overwhelmingly Democratic electorate. In 2004, amazingly enough, Massachusetts had a Republican Governor, Mitt Romney. Its Senator John Forbes Kerry was seeking the Presidency or Vice Presidency. The decisively Democratic Legislature changed the law, from gubernatorial appointment to a special election to occur 145 - 160 days after the vacancy. There presently are several proposals within Massachusetts as to the ideal law.
There also is focus upon the subject in other States, in light of an unusually high jumble of recent midterm vacancies. Illinois offered its much and duly publicized scandal regarding sale of the Barack Hussein Obama Senate seat, the Governor impeached, so forth. Delaware managed to avoid scandal in appointment of an interim Senator to succeed Vice President-elect Joseph R. Biden, Jr., although some people contend the appointment merely is a device to hold open the seat for the Vice President's son - as it at least appears to be. There is relatively minor commotion in Florida in that Governor Charles (Charlie) Crist appointed his former Chief of Staff to hold the seat for him until the expiration of the term, January 2011, after the November, 2010 election, as to which Governor Crist has made clear his own candidacy. There also is some Texas commotion in that GOP Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson is resigning, to begin a candidacy against GOP Governor Rick Perry. Colorado managed to avoid commotion, when the Democratic Governor appointed a Democrat to succeed resigning Senator, now Secretary of the Interior, Kenneth Salazar.
A rash of legislative proposals is pending in Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New York and Vermont. United States Senators of both Parties have intruded into the act, as though a Constitutional amendment were advisable and likely to be ratified. Irrespective of one's views as to what one's State law should be, it seems clear historical and Constitutional precedent should be followed, fading federalism honored, each State to enact its own law.
ML/NJ
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.