Massachusetts Changes Law So Kennedy Replacement Can Be Appointed

fullmetalfan720

fullmetalfan720

CAGiversary!
Feedback
11 (100%)
BOSTON — The governor of Massachusetts named former Democratic Party chairman Paul G. Kirk Jr. on Thursday to temporarily fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's seat, acknowledging the appointment was controversial but saying the issues before Congress were "too important to Massachusetts for us to be one voice short."
Kirk, a Kennedy family friend, served on Edward Kennedy's staff for eight years and is chairman of the JFK Library Foundation. Kennedy's widow, Vicki Kennedy, and son Edward Kennedy Jr. had urged Patrick to pick Kirk and attended the announcement at the Massachusetts Statehouse.
"He (Sen. Kennedy) often said that representing the people of Massachusetts in the Senate of the United States was the highest honor that he could possible imagine, and it is certainly nothing that I imagined, but it will be my highest honor, as well," Kirk said.
Gov. Deval Patrick's appointment means Kirk will serve in the interim post until voters pick a replacement in a Jan. 19 special election. Kirk said he would not be a candidate in the special election.
This week, lawmakers gave Patrick the appointment power, five years after taking that power away when Republican Mitt Romney was in office. The legislation did not take effect immediately, so Patrick had to sign an emergency letter Thursday to make the appointment right away.
The interim senator allows President Barack Obama to regain a critical 60th U.S. Senate vote he needs to pass a health care overhaul.
Sen. John Kerry, who also attended the announcement, called Kirk a "superb steward for this seat" and said he already has a personal relationship with many of the people he will be working with during his brief time in Kennedy's former office.
"Paul Kirk shares Ted's love of the commonwealth and the country and shares his passion for public service," Kerry said, adding "he is going to hit the ground running."
Kirk, 71, is a Boston attorney who also has been a registered lobbyist for pharmaceutical companies. He sits on the board of Hartford Financial Services, known colloquially as "The Hartford." It sells life and property insurance.
Early in his career, he spent eight years on the senator's staff. He was master of ceremonies last month for a memorial service the evening before Kennedy's funeral.
Kennedy died Aug. 25 after a yearlong battle with brain cancer. Kirk has been helping with efforts to raise money for a Senate institute named for him. Organizers have been criticized for accepting donations from the health care industry while Kennedy and the White House pushed for an industry overhaul.
Click to expand...
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/politics/former_dnc_chairman_named_kennedy_MO6yqnsD4GhZIYc3SjETJK
Wow. They change the law for the possibility that Kerry might win the presidency, and they might lose his seat. Then when Ted Kennedy dies, they change it so that the governor can appoint someone instead of waiting for a special election. Not only that, but the governor declares an "emergency," so that he can appoint someone without waiting the required 90 days.
 
This change was fine--the one for Kerry was dumb.

You need a temporary appointment until an election so a state isn't down a senator for months until a special election can be held.

Every state should be required to have a plan in place for a temporary appointment IMO--no state should be down a senator or congressman while waiting the months it takes to get a special election held.
 
Actually up until recently it had always been this way. Then they decided to revoke the governors right to appoint an emergency replacement in favor of waiting for a special election that took way too long. Now they just changed it back to the way it always was and is in most every other state.
Kirk will have to step down in Jan when the election finally does take place. He is not allowed to run.

Not news really.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']This change was fine--the one for Kerry was dumb.[/quote]
True. I find it a bit ridiculous that Massachusetts decides to bends the law for political gain in the first place, and then has to bend it back when that backfires. It would be better to just go back to the state legislative branch appointing Senators. We wouldn't have this problem, the problem of recounts, and it would give states more power. Besides, that is what the founders originally put in place.
You need a temporary appointment until an election so a state isn't down a senator for months until a special election can be held.

Every state should be required to have a plan in place for a temporary appointment IMO--no state should be down a senator or congressman while waiting the months it takes to get a special election held.
Click to expand...
That isn't what happened here. Poor Amy Klobuchar.
 
I'm not sure how Romney got elected but I have a feeling we'll be seeing another republican here with the way Patrick is doing things.

The governors appointment is only temporary. Once the election is held the appointee has to step down. He is unable to run or get elected.

So there will be no Blagojovich nonsense. It's a 3-month position.
 
[quote name='HowStern']So there will be no Blagojovich nonsense. It's a 3-month position.[/QUOTE]

Lucky you. ;)

Anywhoo, seems like some bad form going on here. I would like to see such laws regarding elections and appointments require a waiting period before going into effect - like two elections or such. This would prevent politicians from changing laws to fit their whim of the moment.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Lucky you. ;)

Anywhoo, seems like some bad form going on here. I would like to see such laws regarding elections and appointments require a waiting period before going into effect - like two elections or such. This would prevent politicians from changing laws to fit their whim of the moment.[/QUOTE]

Good luck getting something like that in place. It'll be a cold day in hell that the two corrupt parties in power now voluntarily limit their ability to politick.

This appointment is ridiculous. It's ridiculous that anyone can be appointed at all, but even more ridiculous that we have political "dynasties." Kennedy's family choice for senator in Massachusetts. Biden's guy in Delaware. Hell, Frank Murkowski appointed his daughter to his seat in Alaska a few years back. This kind of crap goes against everything this country has always stood for, and it's a sorry sight to see.

We now have six senators who have never faced an election for their seats:

Kirk (MA)
Kaufman (DE)
LeMieux (FL)
Bennet (CO)
Gillibrand (NY)
Burris (IL)

That is a ridiculous amount of power to put into unelected hands. Consider that a single senator can hold up legislation or nominations for months by putting a hold on them; it can even be anonymous.

I'm afraid that Feingold is right and we need an amendment to slap down the forces of anti-democracy which won another victory today.
 
I definitely think it's a problem with the appointments aren't temporary.

They should all be like this one. Just for a few months, and the apointee isn't even eligible to run in the special election.

I don't think seats should stay empty for months until a special election, but the appointee shouldn't stay on until the next scheduled election as they do in some states or be eligible to run in a special election.
 
Yeah exactly like dmaul says.

If anything this is one of the most sensible appointment laws out there. It's temporary and well restricted.
 
I don't see what's the problem. This is what Ted Kennedy wanted, so it is done. He knew that Republicans cannot to be trusted with such an important decision, so this new law is simply one of the ways to look out for us who are too beneath, inferior, and intellectually incapable to make the right decisions. Thank god that even from beyond the grave Ted Kennedy is still watching and making the right decisions for us all.
 
Rumblebear are you completely ignorant of how this works?

You do know that the people here in Massachusetts will be holding an election for Kennedy's empty seat in January and this appointment is only held until then with the appointee being banned from keeping the seat or being elected for it?
 
[quote name='rumblebear']I don't see what's the problem. This is what Ted Kennedy wanted, so it is done. He knew that Republicans cannot to be trusted with such an important decision, so this new law is simply one of the ways to look out for us who are too beneath, inferior, and intellectually incapable to make the right decisions. Thank god that even from beyond the grave Ted Kennedy is still watching and making the right decisions for us all.[/QUOTE]
Still promoting that Kennedy conspiracy, huh?
 
I do question the restriction of not letting the temp appointment run. Ideally, you want the "best" individual in the seat, right? So, either you have to put the best individual in the seat now, for all the "important" issues and get screwed at the election, or put the 2nd best individual in the seat now and not have your best person there for the "important" issues...
 
That's a valid point that I wonder about too. But how can you really tell if someone only in there for 3 months is the best person though anyway?
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I do question the restriction of not letting the temp appointment run. Ideally, you want the "best" individual in the seat, right? So, either you have to put the best individual in the seat now, for all the "important" issues and get screwed at the election, or put the 2nd best individual in the seat now and not have your best person there for the "important" issues...[/QUOTE]

It's because they'd have an unfair advantage in name recognition etc. from being an "incumbent" who wasn't elected. Incumbent in quotes since it's only a few months, but it's still an unfair leg up.
 
[quote name='HowStern']Rumblebear are you completely ignorant of how this works?

You do know that the people here in Massachusetts will be holding an election for Kennedy's empty seat in January and this appointment is only held until then with the appointee being banned from keeping the seat or being elected for it?[/QUOTE]

Hmm a hater, are you one of the racist Republican here? Ofcourse I know how this works, unlike dimwitted people such as youself.

And are you're suggesting this new appointment isn't important at all since the interim Senator will only be serving for a few months? Why would Ted Kennedy and the entire MA legislator went through all this work and trouble just for a temporary appointment then? Just think about it.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']It's because they'd have an unfair advantage in name recognition etc. from being an "incumbent" who wasn't elected. Incumbent in quotes since it's only a few months, but it's still an unfair leg up.[/QUOTE]

Nope. It's there to nip any future ambition the newly appointed senator might have. That way the new senator will only be accountable to the people who appointed him, and not the commonwealth since he will not seek an election. The new senator will also get a great pension out of it for this short stint.

It also serves as a great seat-warmer to the actual person Ted wants. Like when JFK had his college buddy appointed to keep the seat warm until his brother Ted is old enough to replace him, or Joe Biden having his loyal aide keep his seat for when his son is ready.
 
But until then this guy can be a Democratic Party stooge and provide the 60th vote for them in the Senate, while (as rumblebear correctly pointed out) keeping the seat warm for the Kennedy family's pick for his successor.

BTW, if the Republican rep (Mike Castle) runs in Delaware, he probably can beat Beau Biden. Although I'm not a fan of Castle or most Republicans for that matter, at least that would deny the "dynasty" idiocy we seem stuck with recently as a country...most recently these morons:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/400999/dana_carvey_as_bush/

watch
 
Yeah, if Mass. had an election in Nov, they probably would have just done the special election then I'd assume.

But it takes longer to get it set up since there's not one this fall.
 
Sorry, I meant to say November 2010.

My understand is that this upcoming election would not be for a full term, nor the rest of Kennedy's. It'd be until the next Congressional election (Which would be 2010).
 
STUTTERING STANLEY STUTTERING STANLEY!!!!

seriously, i was ashamed to admit to my international friends that he was my president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top