Feingold: End Senate Appointments

[luiz]

In Brazil what we do is that every Congressman has a "backup", that is, someone that will take his seat if he takes another position, dies or is any other way uncapable of performing his job as a congressman.

In theory, the voters should pay attention to the backups and take that in consideration when voting. In practice most don't, and we end up with a bunch of unknowns that nobody likes, but it works very well in theory IMO.

 

[.Shane.]

Here's a thought. Fill the seat w/ the most immediate family member:

1. Spouse
2. Eldest child to youngest
3. Surviving parents

On the condition that no one from the family can run for the open seat in the election to fill it, which should take place no later than 1 year for a Senate vacancy and 6 months for a House vacancy.

 

[zjl56]

This is a good idea, but it'll never pass given the absolute BS of state's rights and "
budget" concerns over a minor election. At the end of the day those who scream that we are the freest nation will try as hard as they can to diminish that freedom.

 

[luiz]

Here's a thought. Fill the seat w/ the most immediate family member:

1. Spouse
2. Eldest child to youngest
3. Surviving parents

On the condition that no one from the family can run for the open seat in the election to fill it, which should take place no later than 1 year for a Senate vacancy and 6 months for a House vacancy.

I have never seen a worse idea from a relatively sane person.

 

[.Shane.]

I have never seen a worse idea from a relatively sane person.

lol, well, I wasn't being entirely serious.

Its a bit of a side-topic, but I'm not fond of how so many seats in politics get handed down throughout family histories. So, my thought was a way to quickly fill the seat and prevent it from becoming something passed down through nepotism.

 

[general_kill]

Recent events have certainly challenged the logic of senate appointments and the practice definitely proves to be imperfect. I do not really understand what the argument of state right is under Feingold's proposal. Special elections do not take away a State's ability to choose their senator nor does it increase federal power. What does worry me about Feingold's amendment is the loss of check and balance. By allowing the governor to appoint senators, the office of the senator is partially protected from the temporary sway of public opinion. This is the same reason why Supreme Court Justices are appointed and not elected.

So I really don't know, if we pass the amendment, we can protect ourselves from future blaggo picks. At the same time, we open the door for a demagogue to grab power before s/he has been properly vetted.

 

[bhsup]

Here's a thought. Fill the seat w/ the most immediate family member:

1. Spouse
2. Eldest child to youngest
3. Surviving parents

On the condition that no one from the family can run for the open seat in the election to fill it, which should take place no later than 1 year for a Senate vacancy and 6 months for a House vacancy.

That is what we did in Missouri in 2000 when Mel Carnahan died just a few weeks before the election. The acting Governor (Carnahan was gov running for Senate) said if Carnahan won, his wife would get it. And that is how John Ashcroft lost to a dead guy.

 

[Bill3000]

It's not the federal government's business.

How the hell isn't it the federal government's business if there's a corrupt senator in Congress?

 

[Merkinball]

How the hell isn't it the federal government's business if there's a corrupt senator in Congress?

I would like to disagree with you here, but I cannot strike through your. impenitrible logic.

 

[Irish Caesar]

I voted that the change is a good idea, as it seems to be the logical conclusion of the Seventeenth. I did read a lot of comments, though, from angles I hadn't thought much about before voting.

Hmmm.... I think appointments can work, we just need two things (assuming we're talking about Senate seats):

1. The election to fill the seat happens the next following year, rather than the next election cycle.
2. Create a uniform appointment system.

TBH, I think he's over-reacting.

He is over-reacting, but that's okay.

I agree with point #1 in theory, but there isn't much to vote on in odd years, unless you're in a state where the governor is elected in odd years. From a practical standpoint, you probably won't get desired turnout for electing a Senator.

I'm not sure if I agree with point #2. I don't have a problem with a state deciding how the appointment should go. I suppose if I were the average Bay Stater and Sen. Kerry won the presidency in 2004, I wouldn't have wanted Gov. Romney to fill his seat with a Republican... but if it's Governor's Choice everywhere, nobody gets to complain about that, I suppose...

I don't think state's rights applies here. A corrupt senator getting appointed would affect the whole nation because they vote on laws for the whole nation, so this is a national issue, not a state issue.

Corrupt Senators are elected far more often then they are appointed, I'm sure.

In Brazil what we do is that every Congressman has a "backup", that is, someone that will take his seat if he takes another position, dies or is any other way uncapable of performing his job as a congressman.

In theory, the voters should pay attention to the backups and take that in consideration when voting. In practice most don't, and we end up with a bunch of unknowns that nobody likes, but it works very well in theory IMO.

This idea stood out to me. Specifically this election cycle.

I don't like the way Sen. Biden ran for both VP and Senator at once, knowing that he had no intention of being a Senator. If Obama had lost the election, fine, Joe gets his seat... but I like the idea of a "backup" in this case. Illinois could have voted for a "just in case!" Senator, as could Delaware.

Of course, you'd still get Senators leaving the Senate due to getting either promoted or other natural but less positive means. In that case, it wouldn't really be fair for a district to have their Congressman be chosen as the Senate backup. Another problem would be figuring out the backup's job when (s)he isn't needed.

***

I suppose as the last note... if someone is willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a Senate seat that (s)he'll need to vacate in a year or two anyway, isn't that his own problem?

 

[Cutlass]

As far as I know, several of the Senators running for pres/vp have also ran to keep their Senate seat in the event of a loss. It's kind of the standard model at this point

 

[Irish Caesar]

As far as I know, several of the Senators running for pres/vp have also ran to keep their Senate seat in the event of a loss. It's kind of the standard model at this point

I know they all do it.

I just don't like it, is all.

 

[sonorakitch]

This is a very strange idea.

So we have a national body insert a figure poised to represent a small portion of that body? Rather than allow the portion of the national body to insert the figure?

I think Feingold should stick to other items. This one just doesn't make any sense.

~Chris

 

[jeps]

You guys know NOTHING about senate appointments.
$122,700/year to whoever is friends with the PM in a province where the old senator turned 75.

in short, they suck. end the senate. or make it 100% elected. have a by-election, in your case. its the cool thing to do.

 

[Irish Caesar]

So we have a national body insert a figure poised to represent a small portion of that body? Rather than allow the portion of the national body to insert the figure?

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here.

 

[bhsup]

I wish they would abolish the 19th amendment and return Senate seat appointments to the legislature. Make it like it was where they were more beholden to the State they are supposed to represent than the nation as a whole or the federal government.

 

[amadeus]

How the hell isn't it the federal government's business if there's a corrupt senator in Congress?

Not the feds place to decide how the state appoints the senator until the next election.

 

[Dachs]

I wish they would abolish the 19th amendment and return Senate seat appointments to the legislature. Make it like it was where they were more beholden to the State they are supposed to represent than the nation as a whole or the federal government.

Who cares about the State? Why does the State have a better chance of representing the People's interests than the vote of those People? And stop with that nation as a whole strawman.

 

[MobBoss]

Hmmm.... I think appointments can work, we just need two things (assuming we're talking about Senate seats):

1. The election to fill the seat happens the next following year, rather than the next election cycle.
2. Create a uniform appointment system.

TBH, I think he's over-reacting.

I agree with Shane on this one. Except, I dont think its a good idea to leave a senate seat unfilled for so long.

I think the absolute question is does doing this justify the cost?

Because in todays world where many states are in huge debt, does it seem smart to do something that will absolutely result in more cost to our local governments? Because special elections aint cheap.

 

[Irish Caesar]

I wish they would abolish the 19th amendment and return Senate seat appointments to the legislature. Make it like it was where they were more beholden to the State they are supposed to represent than the nation as a whole or the federal government.

The truth comes out...



I'll assume you mean the 17th and say that my impression of state legislatures is worse than my impression of the people of the state at large. I suppose state legislatures picking Senators would make it possible for an incumbent to lose, but I think it would be unlikely to ever elect a Senator from the party which doesn't have the majority in the State House.