Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs
People be aghast! Yes, I agree with this editorial in the Sun, that should there be a Senate vacancy…for any reason, though the current one regards Kerry’s potential resignation to join the Obama administration (how good that feels to type!)…a special election should be held for the voters to decide at least on some level who to replace him with.
Let’s face it - name recognition and a war chest (I can think of some current and former Reps, especially former, who have kept and/or raised money for this moment) in a special election will count for more than grassroots ground game. The turnaround on a special election is so short, no one can run a real campaign. I find this incredibly sad, but still better than the alternative - appointing someone for a nearly 6-year term, crowning them with incumbency which is a near-guarantee of reelection in 2014. Now, unlike the Sun leadership, I actually am happy the Dems control the state legislature, and even happier that we have the Governorship, and do trust Governor Patrick’s motivations and abilities to pick out a stellar candidate for the job - but that still doesn’t make it right. If anything, the special election law should be changed to make the campaign a longer one instead of a mere 160 days, so that we can truly have a real race. (Then again, most nations’ national elections are about that short - the US is the only place where people run for the top spot for over two years…)
PS - I do want to pick a nit with the editorial, however. It gives you the impression Patrick is pushing for appointment capability. He’s not - he said he’d be interested in doing it in the interest of saving money, but he’s not going to lobby for the case. Given that, it’s far more likely that the legislature changes the special elections law to give itself the capability to “elect” the next Senator rather than hand it over to Patrick. Also a bad move in my opinion.
[powered by WordPress.]
43 queries. 0.614 seconds
November 10th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I could be wrong but I think that when a governor appoints someone to a Senate seat, they only serve for 2 years before facing an election - they don’t serve the full 6 years.
November 10th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Still gives them a pretty huge incumbency advantage.
November 10th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Also, that depends on the law. Maybe the law used to be that way before it was changed to special election, but it doesn’t mean it would be if the Governor were given back the ability to appoint!