If Kerry is elected what happens to his Senate seat?

[bluestateguy]

The Republican governor of Massachusetts would appoint a Republican if Kerry won. With control of the Senate hanging in the balance, I'm not so sure that is a loss we can afford. One option I thought of, though I'm not sure if it's constitutional, would be for the veto-proof Democratic majority in the legislature to pass a law mandating that the governor appoint a senator of the same party as the departing senator until such time as a special election can be held.

[AWD]

1. Repub governor replaces him

Mitt Romney gets to select a replacement.

Unless I'm mistaken and Kerry is up for reelection in '04...then the race is normal.

[TSIAS]

2. Kerry was reelected in 2002

So it would probably be a Repub replacement.

[AWD]

5. Psst....

....I'm not worried. Don't tell the ohn-Jay erry-Kay followers.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

19. No, Kerry was just re-elected in 2002

But not too many people know that because he was running unopposed so his race got no attention. I find it really strange that the GOP, which had to know that he was going to run for president, would let him run unopposed and build up a warchest that he was able to transfer to his presidential campaign.

[dusty64]

3. Not to mention the

seats of Edwards and Graham which are in extreme jeopardy if these two don't sh*t or get off the pot, the clock is ticking.

[ElephantHunter]

8. not to mention...

Zell Miller and Fritz Hollings seats are pretty much guaranteed to go Republican in 2004. Kerry's seat won't make a difference. Democrats cannot recapture the Senate or the House in 2004.

[goobergunch]

9. I dissent, pessimist.

GA: Andrew Young may be able to take advantage of a divisive Repuke primary between Johnny Isakson and Mac Collins.

SC: Inez Tenenbaum will make an extremely strong candidate against Jim DeMint.

[JohnKleeb]

11. I would like John Lewis to run in GA but Young sounds good

[ElephantHunter]

16. yeah ok

Reality Check:
With George Bush at the top of the ticket in 2004 and easily winning SC and GA, Democrat Senators have no chance in those 2 states.

[arcos]

31. Not true... n/t

[Clete]

12. I think the Republicans are going to lose

big time in the House and Senate this next election. You know why? They have had enough time to show their real faces now that they are in control.

[GBD4]

14. Exactly

The Congressional Campaign message for 04 must be this: the Repubs have controlled the House for ten years, and they now control the Senate, too, and what major accomplishments can they show for their time in control?

[Hippo_Tron]

24. When exactly does the re-districting fully take place?

It seems as though the only way the House changes party control is when there is a new census and the districts are re-aligned. Newt Gingrich and the Republicans took control in 1994 so that probably means all of the re-districting for the 90's was finished by then. Of course re-districting won't help the Democrats considering all of the shit that's going on in Texas right now. There's only two possibilites that will give the Democrats the Senate in 2004.

1) The economy still sucks, people will believe that the tax cut did nothing except cut funding from important programs.

2) There are more blackouts like the recent ones we just had, in states where Republican Senators are up for re-election. Democratic candidates win those seats by bashing the Republican energy policy.

Personally I'd rather have a good economy and no blackouts than a Democratic Senate Majority but those are the ways that we could win. The House could actually fall into our control for the same reasons but is much less likely to.

[oasis]

26. Ooops, I thought Zell Miller was a Republican. At any rate, no loss.

[CMT]

35. actually, no

we have some good candidates running in both SC and Ga and one SC poll shows Inez Tennebaum leading the leading GOP candidates.

[AWD]

4. Gulp

One option I thought of, though I'm not sure if it's constitutional, would be for the veto-proof Democratic majority in the legislature to pass a law mandating that the governor appoint a senator of the same party as the departing senator until such time as a special election can be held.

I was against this when the Repubs tried to force it on us in case of Strom death, so I'd have t be fair and stay against it here too....rule of law. We hate it when they change it, we shouldn't like it when we try to change it.

[scoelhoMA]

6. John Kerry

We will take care of Romney don't you worry. He will be out of the senate in 2006. no matter what he does.

[DavidNY]

34. That's not the only option, though...

rather than tying the governor's hands in such an artificial way, which I agree is problematic, the legislature could pass a law recognizing that vacancies which are anticipated far enough in advance can be filled by the people. That is, the legislature could pass a law stating that whenever a Senator announces his resignation at least 60 days in advance of its taking effect, the seat will be filled not be appointment but by a special election held on the date the resignation takes effect. Then Kerry could, if he won, announce by November 20th that he was resigning effective January 20th (Inauguration Day).

It does have a similar flavor of changing the laws, I grant you, but it seems more justifiable as a matter of principle, since a big part of the theoretical justification behind gubernatorial appointments to fill Senate vacancies is that a sudden vacancy shouldn't go unfilled while you sort out the details of an election (which wouldn't apply in this sort of case)...

[Kathy in Cambridge]

7. That's Why I'm Waffling on my Presidential Choice

knowing that Repuke Mitt Romney-who has already done enough to turn Massachusetts into Mississippi-will replace Kerry with a right wing Repuke.

I don't want to lose my Senator, and we definitely don't want to wait until 2006 to be able to vote out the Romney Repuke replacement.

[Andy_Stephenson]

10. But Kerry will need the help of the Republicans to....

continue the PNAC agenda...Anyway it is academic...Kerry is not going to win the nomination.

[oasis]

27. Kerry's cabinet will include PNACers Cheney, Wolfowitz and Woolsey.

Frank Gaffney will be Sec. of state and Rummy will retain his Defense Dept. post.:eyes:

[gmoney]

13. No offense, but...

...if Kerry is elected, I'm confident Santa Claus will step up to fill his Senate seat.

[ButterflyBlood]

15. I think the requirement by the legislature is a good idea

apparentely Barney Frank is interested in the seat.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

17. Barney Frank would be a great replacement

he's pretty damn liberal

[CMT]

36. he would be

but there isn't a snowball chance in hell that Republican Governor Romney would appoint Barney Frank. It will be some "moderate" republican.

[welshTerrier2]

37. Barney Would Be Great

i think Marty Meehan (who voted for the Iraq Resolution and, just like Kerry, ignored a 20-1 call ratio against the resolution) also might have a shot ...

let's hope Barney's the next new senator ... his sharp wit and biting observations would be a breath of fresh air in the Senate ...

[UnapologeticLiberal]

21. No, I agree that it is not a good idea

They tried to pass a rule like that in South Carolina in 2000 and I opposed it, so like someone else said, we have to be fair. And I would especially oppose a rule like this in the case of a vacancy that results from winning a higher office, because Kerry is running for president knowing that he will have to leave his senate seat in the hands of a Republican governor, and he is making the choice to take that risk. In the case of a death I might feel differently...I think it is wrong for a governor to appoint a member of his or her own party to replace a senator from the other party who dies.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

18. Same thing with Lieberman

But I believe that in both states an appointed Senator would have to stand for election after a short period of time, so we might be able to take the seat back.

[Hippo_Tron]

20. Do you mean elected or nominated?

If he is elected, having a senate majority is very much secondary to having a Democrat in the white house. If nominated but doesn't win I don't think it matters because I don't think he is up for re-election to the senate.

[userdave2061]

22. What? Did MA run out of Kennedys to fill the Senate?

Viagra now! We need to breed more Kennedys to fill these empty seats!

[ringmastery]

23. Question

How the hell does Massachusetts, one of the most democratic states in the country, have a repuke governor? Is it a taxes thing?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

25. It's a balance thing

our former Republican Governors were very liberal (pro-choice, social services, etc). Romney is more conservative and a huge ass.

[semass]

30. Because they run against the legislative leadership

which is held in pretty low esteem by the largest voting block the unenrolled(Independent)voter. Romney won by wrapping the legislative leadership around Shannon O'Brien's neck.

[Yupster]

28. Does Mass law allow...

Kerry to run for president and senator on the same ballot ala Lieberman and Bentsen?

[arcos]

32. no need to, since he is not up for reelection in 2004... n/t

[Yupster]

38. Bonk

thanks for straightening me out.

[quinnox]

29. To exchange a Dem senator for a Dem president

is a deal I would take every time.

[DavidNY]

33. Kerry will _not_ be replaced by a Republican if the Massachusetts Leg....

knows what it's doing. Under the 17th Amendment, the governor only has the power to make a temporary appointment to fill a vacant Senate seat if the legislature gives it to him, and under such conditions as they provide. See http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/amend.html -- "When vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct." (In Arizona, I believe, for example, the governor has no appointment power.) And as you say, the Democrats have a veto-proof majority in both houses of the Massachusetts legislature.

The Massachusetts legislature doesn't even have to stop at mandating a same-party replacement. It could pass a law stating that any Senator who announces his resignation 60 days in advance of its taking effect will be replaced not by appointment but by a special election held on the date his resignation becomes effective. (The legislature could also take away the governor's appointment power entirely, but that could be painted as weakening our government in the event of a catastrophic terrorist attack.) Then if elected, Kerry could announce his resignation by November 20th and be replaced by a special election on or right after Inauguration Day (January 20th).

[Starpass]

39. Don't worry sweetheart

If Dean is the nominee, he will clean our so many Dem senators and representatives as he loses 50 states that it won't matter anyhow. I'll take the risk.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

40. Riordan repuke gets to pick his replacement...but he would have to..

replace him with another dem...or look like a nazi