curb your governor
Dec. 9th, 2008 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
calimacNow that the Governor of Illinois has been not just indicted, but arrested (Holy [expletive]!), for trying to sell Obama's vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder, perhaps a few words about gubernatorial appointments to Senate seats is in order.
The power to appoint Senators to fill vacancies was originally given to Governors in Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution. The reason for this was that Senators were originally elected by their state legislatures, and legislatures usually only met for a few months a year, in some states only every two years. If a Senate vacancy occurred at an awkward time, a state could go a long while Senator-less without gubernatorial intervention.
The big problem with legislative election was frequent deadlocks. Sometimes when the legislature adjourned without electing a Senator, a Governor would make an appointment. The Senate, which is judge of the qualifications of its own members, would always turn these down. Gubernatorial appointment was only to hold the fort until the next legislative session. If the legislature decided, in its wisdom, to do without a Senator, that wasn't the Governor's problem.
Mostly because of some egregious vacancies, and blatant attempts to buy seats by bribing legislators, the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, electing Senators by popular vote. Gubernatorial appointment to fill between-term vacancies was retained, but the wording was different: "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 other words, it's left up to state law. Most states allow appointments, and then elect a successor at the next regular biennial election. A few prefer not to allow appointments, and shoulder the expense of calling a special election (unless a regular election is imminent). In recent years, two states which used to have gubernatorial appointments have taken it away. In Massachusetts in 2004, the legislature was dismayed at the idea of a Republican Governor appointing John Kerry's successor if he were elected President, so they changed the law. In Alaska a couple years earlier, when a serving Senator was elected Governor, he got to appoint his own successor, and chose his own daughter. Admittedly she was a prominent state legislator herself, but the nepotism was too embarrassing, so the law was changed.
One or two states deal with the party-balance problem by requiring the Governor to choose an appointee from a list provided by the party holding the seat. Before recent decades this was never a problem. If a Senator died, and the Governor happened to be of the other party, the seat changed hands, and there was nothing anybody could do about it until the next election.
Appointment as an interim Senator can be a huge boost for an ambitious politician. Walter Mondale and George Mitchell are two prominent cases who might or might not have been able to win a vacant seat at an election, but appointed incumbency gave them secure seats.
But that can be tricky too. Once an ill Senator died during the middle of the campaign to succeed him. The Governor appointed the candidate of his own party (which was also the deceased Senator's party) to fill the vacancy. This sudden change of a vacant-seat race into an incumbent-vs.-challenger race did not sit well, and the challenger won the election.
Often enough, though, a Governor will appoint a placeholder who has no intention of running for election. One blatant case of this came with JFK's Senate seat in 1960. Everyone assumed the seat was designated for JFK's brother Teddy, but Teddy was only 28 - too young to hold office. So the compliant Governor appointed JFK's college roommate (whose political experience consisted of a year as a small-town mayor) to fill the seat. By the time the biennial election came up two years later, Teddy Kennedy was old enough to run, and we all know what happened then.
Joe Biden's replacement is a placeholder. His name is Ted Kaufman; he was Biden's chief of staff until he retired a few years ago. Again suspicions are that he was chosen to keep it occupied until Beau Biden can return from Iraq and run to succeed his father. But not all placeholders are chosen with such political maneuvering in mind.
Once in a while a Governor will try to appoint himself to the Senate. Technically what happens is that he has to resign as Governor and have his replacement appoint him. This never works out well. When a Senator who makes himself this way comes up for election, a loss is almost inevitable. The Governor of Minnesota who appointed himself to fill Mondale's seat in 1976 destroyed the prospects of the Democratic party for statewide office for a decade that way.
But while there have been corrupt Senatorial elections, especially back in the legislative-election days, I can't recall any cases of candidates trying to bribe Governors for appointment to a vacancy, still less - until now - the Governor doing the bribing. Something new, but not to be celebrated.
The power to appoint Senators to fill vacancies was originally given to Governors in Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution. The reason for this was that Senators were originally elected by their state legislatures, and legislatures usually only met for a few months a year, in some states only every two years. If a Senate vacancy occurred at an awkward time, a state could go a long while Senator-less without gubernatorial intervention.
The big problem with legislative election was frequent deadlocks. Sometimes when the legislature adjourned without electing a Senator, a Governor would make an appointment. The Senate, which is judge of the qualifications of its own members, would always turn these down. Gubernatorial appointment was only to hold the fort until the next legislative session. If the legislature decided, in its wisdom, to do without a Senator, that wasn't the Governor's problem.
Mostly because of some egregious vacancies, and blatant attempts to buy seats by bribing legislators, the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, electing Senators by popular vote. Gubernatorial appointment to fill between-term vacancies was retained, but the wording was different: "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 other words, it's left up to state law. Most states allow appointments, and then elect a successor at the next regular biennial election. A few prefer not to allow appointments, and shoulder the expense of calling a special election (unless a regular election is imminent). In recent years, two states which used to have gubernatorial appointments have taken it away. In Massachusetts in 2004, the legislature was dismayed at the idea of a Republican Governor appointing John Kerry's successor if he were elected President, so they changed the law. In Alaska a couple years earlier, when a serving Senator was elected Governor, he got to appoint his own successor, and chose his own daughter. Admittedly she was a prominent state legislator herself, but the nepotism was too embarrassing, so the law was changed.
One or two states deal with the party-balance problem by requiring the Governor to choose an appointee from a list provided by the party holding the seat. Before recent decades this was never a problem. If a Senator died, and the Governor happened to be of the other party, the seat changed hands, and there was nothing anybody could do about it until the next election.
Appointment as an interim Senator can be a huge boost for an ambitious politician. Walter Mondale and George Mitchell are two prominent cases who might or might not have been able to win a vacant seat at an election, but appointed incumbency gave them secure seats.
But that can be tricky too. Once an ill Senator died during the middle of the campaign to succeed him. The Governor appointed the candidate of his own party (which was also the deceased Senator's party) to fill the vacancy. This sudden change of a vacant-seat race into an incumbent-vs.-challenger race did not sit well, and the challenger won the election.
Often enough, though, a Governor will appoint a placeholder who has no intention of running for election. One blatant case of this came with JFK's Senate seat in 1960. Everyone assumed the seat was designated for JFK's brother Teddy, but Teddy was only 28 - too young to hold office. So the compliant Governor appointed JFK's college roommate (whose political experience consisted of a year as a small-town mayor) to fill the seat. By the time the biennial election came up two years later, Teddy Kennedy was old enough to run, and we all know what happened then.
Joe Biden's replacement is a placeholder. His name is Ted Kaufman; he was Biden's chief of staff until he retired a few years ago. Again suspicions are that he was chosen to keep it occupied until Beau Biden can return from Iraq and run to succeed his father. But not all placeholders are chosen with such political maneuvering in mind.
Once in a while a Governor will try to appoint himself to the Senate. Technically what happens is that he has to resign as Governor and have his replacement appoint him. This never works out well. When a Senator who makes himself this way comes up for election, a loss is almost inevitable. The Governor of Minnesota who appointed himself to fill Mondale's seat in 1976 destroyed the prospects of the Democratic party for statewide office for a decade that way.
But while there have been corrupt Senatorial elections, especially back in the legislative-election days, I can't recall any cases of candidates trying to bribe Governors for appointment to a vacancy, still less - until now - the Governor doing the bribing. Something new, but not to be celebrated.
