Senator Russ Feingold:
“The controversies surrounding some of the recent gubernatorial appointments to vacant Senate seats make it painfully clear that such appointments are an anachronism that must end. In 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution gave the citizens of this country the power to finally elect their senators. They should have the same power in the case of unexpected mid term vacancies, so that the Senate is as responsive as possible to the will of the people. I plan to introduce a constitutional amendment this week to require special elections when a Senate seat is vacant, as the Constitution mandates for the House, and as my own state of Wisconsin already requires by statute. As the Chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee, I will hold a hearing on this important topic soon.”1
I have noted, on more than one occasion, my dislike of these appointments and my preference for a special election. As such, I very much applaud this move and wish it luck. The high profile nonsense in Illinois and (to a lesser degree) in New York may actually provide the fuel needed to propel this idea into becoming the 28th Amendment. Such a move would certainly give the US Congress the chance to “do something” in regards to the Blagojevich nonsense. If anything, nepotistic nonsense like the 2002 appointment of Lisa Murkowski to the Senate by her father, Frank, who vacated the seat in question to become Governor of Alaska, should have been enough to justify a change in the process.
h/t: Nate Silver, who also looks at the different methods of replacement of Senators in the 50 states.
Sphere: Related Content- Source: Mark Halperin blogging at Time’s The Page. [↩]
January 26th, 2009 at 9:20 am
I remain a fan of the concept that the senators represent the state and the representatives represent the people of their districts. As such, not only is direct election possibly the worst amendment added, but also appointment by the governor and/or state level assembly by whatever name makes perfect sense.
Which doesn’t make abuse of it by criminals like Blago any less criminal.
Nor is the other guy whose name is on McCain/Feingold exactly a fount of credibility, for all I tried to forgive that with respect to McCain as a candidate.
January 26th, 2009 at 9:54 am
Yet, in representing the state, what do they represent save for the citizens of that state? What are states, anyway, but places where people live? And, beyond that, how does one disaggregate the interests of the state from the collective interest of the people living there? I don’t think you can.
Of course, I would abolish (or at least radically reform) the Senate if given a chance to do so, so perhaps I am not likely to be persuaded that the states qua states need representation.
January 26th, 2009 at 10:17 am
[...] (link via Steven Taylor) [...]
January 26th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
[...] commented in disagreement at http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14952 as I am not a fan of the 17th amendment. [...]
January 27th, 2009 at 2:04 am
[...] the department of colossally good ideas (aka Congress) Steven Taylor, Nate Silver, and Alex Knapp are all on-board with an amendment proposed by Sen. Russ Feingold to [...]
January 27th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
I don’t think it’s a good idea at all. For me, the top problem is replacing senators in an emergency that prevents the Senate from reaching a full quorum. Terrorist attack, plague, that sort of thing. Allowing appointments rather than special elections allows vacancies to be filled quickly.