State of Change

Hold a Special Election for Obama's Seat

posted by John Nichols on 12/09/2008 @ 4:07pm

Almost a century ago, the US Constitution was changed to require the election of US Senators.

The move took the power to populate the Senate away from corrupt governors and dealmaking legislators and rested it with the people -- most of the time.

An unfortunate loophole allowed governors to appoint senators when vacancies occur -- unlike the circumstance with vacancies in the House, which must be filled by special elections.

Only a handful of states -- Wisconsin, Oregon, Alaska, among them -- require that an election be held to replace a senator who dies or quits.

With Senate seats vacant or soon to be vacant in Illinois, Delaware and New York, governors have been preparing to make appointments.

But the news that Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has been arrested on corruption charges -- most of them related to alleged attempts to barter the seat away to the highest bidder -- the flaw in the appointment process is glaringly evident.

Blagojevich should not be allowed to appoint President-elect Barack Obama's successor in the Senate until and unless he is cleared of the charges against him. Yet, Illinosans should have a junior senator.

What to do?

Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, proposes that his home state should hold a special election to fill Obama's seat. And outgoing Illinois Senate President Emil Jones, an Obama ally who has clashed with Blagojevich, has responded to Durbin's call with a plan to ask the Illinois Senate and House to enact legislation that will clear the way for replacement of the president-elect by popular vote.

Durbin is right about this, and Jones is right to act quickly.

The details of what Durbin and Jones are proposing have yet to be worked out. Special elections for vacant House seats in Illinois -- like that of Chicago Congressman Rahm Emanuel, who is leaving to serve as Obama's chief of staff -- are decided with the nomination of candidates in party primaries followed by a general election. Ideally, a Senate special would follow the same pattern.

This is the democratic way to do it.

And, considering Blagojevich's circumstance, it may be the only reasonable route left for getting a new senator seated in short order.

As Durbin says, "No appointment by this governor, under these circumstances, could produce a credible replacement."

A special election would do just that. It would, as well, provide an example to other states of a more honest and democratic way to fill Senate vacancies.

Comments (9)

  1. Why spend money on a special election when times are hard? When the LT Gov takes over any day now, let him use his powers to nominate someone.

    Posted by Weyld1 at 12/09/2008 @ 4:15pm

  2. No way governor's should be allowed to hand out Federal government seats- such as senators - in any case.

    I'm all for making it mandatory that if a senator/represenative/governor runs for president - he/she automatically loses his/her current seat. He/she's been neglecting running for a different office anyway.

    But why let the people decide? We're only the people.

    Posted by urmygyro at 12/09/2008 @ 4:20pm

  3. Blagojevich won't appoint the next Senator, Mr Nichols....who would take the job?

    IMMEDIATELY, you'd be tainted as part of the Blagojevich Scandal and the DNC-Illinois would start looking for a primary challenger for 2010.

    The Lt. Gov will pick the fill-in and they'll be so clean you could eat off their butts.

    Posted by Mask at 12/09/2008 @ 4:24pm

  4. Happy days are here again. I'll take this kind of scandal any day over credit default swaps, FANNIE MAE abuses, hedge fund mania, over the counter something or 'nothers...

    It'd be nice for the big hand of the fed to intervene -- and kick it back to the people not another secret mega bail out. The symbolism is worth the $.

    Oh yeah... Leno for Car Czar

    Posted by winyahn at 12/09/2008 @ 9:24pm

  5. Man, I lived in Chicago a few years, and Blagojevich was a rep from around Wrigley Field--I think. It would be fitting. As was, he was largely regarded as a competent rep, but the whispers were that he should not be given much power as he would wield it with very unsubtle abuse. Well...and yes, he did. Shit, it seems he would have paid Monica Lewinsky to give him a blowjob.

    Who knows, maybe he will appoint Rostenkowski to the senate seat.

    PS--Benchrest: the Fat Tire Abbey is great stuff.

    Posted by onthehelm at 12/09/2008 @ 9:46pm

  6. hell...blago could appoint a crack ho that fits the minimum requirements out of spite.

    he could do it today or tomorrow. the senate says it won't seat anyone, so...

    but he could just appoint someone decent and otherwise acceptable too...

    this guy is really bad news. talk about tamany hall style politics...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/10/2008 @ 08:27am

  7. i mean not only was the guy crooked as hell and despicable, but he was kind of arrogantly stupid.

    the brazenness of it all is crazy. i find it interesting his bizarre, jumbled, almost freudian statement the day prior to his arrest about nixon. if it made sense at all it sounded like he was indicating he WOULD go down like nixon...and considering his lack of concern about who was or was not listening, like nixon i wonder if subconciously he WANTED to get caught.

    regardless...what a story...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/10/2008 @ 09:25am

  8. Whoops, my bad on my comment. I meant to write he would have made Monica Lewinsky pay.

    Posted by onthehelm at 12/10/2008 @ 09:26am

  9. Blagojevich: The quintessence of American political life. Does it make any difference how they manage to get around his right to appoint a replacement for Obama? The next slug will be no different than he was, just not quite as klutzy. And being a Democrat he will be sure to have the unquestioning support of those here whose sole formula for evaluation is some hachnied varient of left/right analytics and who imagine themselves as being of the "left" when in reality they are simply power-seeking Democrats masquerading as ideologues. Rather a progressive anytime than a Democrat. Blagojevich and Mask are Democrats. Don't let the door hit you in the touche on the way out, Mask.

    Posted by john lowell at 12/10/2008 @ 09:42am

Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

Facing Bipartisan Criticism, RNC's Steele Asks If Race Is Factor | "Why? Is it because Michael Steele is the chairman, or is it because a black man is chairman?” he wonders. Maybe he could compare notes with Obama.
John Nichols
Posted at 8:46 PM ET

» Editor's Cut

New Web Column at The Washington Post | Every Tuesday, I'll be featuring progressive thinking about politics and challenging the Right in my new web column for The Washington Post. Read my first one here.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
31 Comments

» The Notion

When Snow Melts: Vancouver’s Olympic Crackdown | Anger is growing in Vancouver in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. Like Olympic clockwork, here comes the media crackdown.
Dave Zirin
42 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

The Mind-Boggling Stupidity of Michael Rubin | How an AEI apparatchik's love affair for Ahmed Chalabi blinds him to Chalabi's pro-Iran treachery.
Robert Dreyfuss
27 Comments

» Act Now!

Demand Question Time | Join the call for the President and Congress to implement regular Question Time sessions.
Peter Rothberg
56 Comments

» And Another Thing

How to Counterbalance Focus on the Family on Superbowl Sunday | Give to help low income girls and women.
Katha Pollitt
54 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Friday | James O'Keefe and Alter-reviews.
Eric Alterman