Submit your comments on this article | |
Home Front: Politix | |
Feingold seeks to end gubernatorial appointment of U.S. senators | |
2009-01-27 | |
With the Illinois governor charged with having tried to sell President Barack Obama’s old Senate seat — and New York’s governor accused by critics of having held a circus-like review to fill the one formerly held by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Feingold says voters — not governors — should make the call in special elections. “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,” Feingold said. Feingold said he will introduce this week what would be just the 28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the framework for American democracy that has been in effect since 1789. His proposed amendment would require that all senators, just like all members of the House of Representatives, be elected. Initially, senators were elected by state legislatures. But the 17th amendment, adopted in 1913, made them elected instead by voters. A third of the Senate is routinely elected ever two years. But in case of a death or a resignation, governors in most states are empowered to appoint a replacement. Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, said that as chairman of the Senate Judiciary’s subcommittee on the Constitution, he plans to soon hold a hearing on his proposed amendment. | |
Posted by:Steve White |
#10 Gee, here's an idea - why not have ALL the Senators appointed by the state legislatures? Wonder why we've never tried that? |
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2009-01-27 22:10 |
#9 Feingold seeks to end gubernatorial appointment of U.S. senators Unless you want to appoint a Kennedy. |
Posted by: bigjim-ky 2009-01-27 21:13 |
#8 Mullah Richard, you must live down the road a piece. Feingold is the only politician I have ever dealt with who does not send boilerplate letters in response to voter input. He sent me about 15 pages of information and explanation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last fall, in response to a question. I disagree with 90% of his positions, but at least he's straightforward. |
Posted by: mom 2009-01-27 17:20 |
#7 Another option would be to have the State Legislatures elect the replacement. Imagine the monkey wrench that could get thrown into the mix if the State House majority and the resigning/dead senator are from differnet parties |
Posted by: Cheaderhead 2009-01-27 17:18 |
#6 Let us all take a moment to quietly reflect on the 17th Amendment. |
Posted by: Iblis 2009-01-27 12:13 |
#5 I like the suggestion, but instead of 90 days, make it till the next scheduled statewide election. That way the state doesn't have the expense of running a special election. While we're at it, how 'bout a run-off (next scheduled) election for any congressional election that's within say 0.5% (i.e. Democrat margin of fraud). |
Posted by: DMFD 2009-01-27 10:57 |
#4 I like Mike's solution only I would changed it in this little way... The temp Senator couldn't run! That would mean they were actually likely to be near Washington or on a Junket. |
Posted by: 3dc 2009-01-27 09:48 |
#3 Yeah, who really needs fifty redundent administrative units that reduce efficiency and consolidation of power for the good of the |
Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-01-27 09:48 |
#2 Actually, Sen. Feingold (Socialist-Wisconsin)is a pretty honest guy, based on his socialist belief system. He truly believes in the "Progressive Way" and is not afraid to tell you. Compared to a lot of politicians who obfuscate their personal beliefs, this is refreshing. Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota was like this, too. Didn't agree with 99% of what he stood for, but respected him for being honest about it. |
Posted by: Mullah Richard 2009-01-27 09:37 |
#1 ...You know, an interesting compromise on this would be that a Governor could appoint a temporary Senator to attend to the state's business, but that he would have to face an election within 90 days. Mike |
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2009-01-27 06:11 |