The political soap opera involving impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich caused a ripple effect in the U.S. Senate.
Blagojevich was governor when it was time to replace President Barack Obama in the Senate. Despite advice, warnings and political threats to not make an appointment to Obama’s vacated Senate seat, Blagojevich did.
He chose longtime Illinois politician Roland Burris. Despite advice, warnings and political threats to not take the appointment, Burris did. He eventually got seated, but a short time later an investigation began into his dealings with the Blagojevich camp before the appointment. Now Burris is an outcast in the Senate, and that leaves Illinois essentially with one senator.
Meanwhile the constitutional directive for a state’s governor to appoint replacements to the Senate also caused ruffles.
As Obama sought to build his bipartisan cabinet, some top prospects were Republican senators from states with Democrat governors. Leaving the Senate to serve the president would mean that a Senate seat would go to the Democrats in states where the governor toted the mule brand. With the Senate filibuster threshold in the balance, Republicans balked at taking up the bipartisanship mantel because it might cost the party big time in Senate votes.
Here’s another twist: In Kentucky, incumbent Republican Sen. Jim Bunning looks beatable when he comes up for re-election. He barely won last go-around and since then has raised no money for his campaign. The Republican National Committee made noise about running someone against Bunning in the Republican primary, and Kentucky political insiders said that Bunning threatened to resign when he heard about the party’s plan. Resignation would leave a Democrat governor to name a replacement.
Bunning denied he said anything about resigning, but you can see the chess game that comes into play under the current system for filling Senate vacancies.
All these scenarios have prompted suggestions for changes in the way the Senate vacancy system works. So, there is a move afoot to craft a constitutional amendment that would create a different process.
Others find the call for a change to the Constitution premature. They say that the most likely process would be a special election, but those cost a lot of money and in some cases vacancies are filled for only short periods before the regular election cycle occurs. That’s not cost efficient.
Below are links to information about the Senate replacement process.
I am curious about how you think it should work.
Resources:
- http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment17/
- http://politicsblog.projo.com/2009/03/ri-house-approv-1.html
- http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=101864
Post new comment