Paul Kirk In As Mass. Senator - Friend To Kennedys, Corporate America?

Deval Patrick picked former DNC Chair Paul Kirk to fill the seat vacated by the late Ted Kennedy today, as expected. I stand by my earlier statement that Kirk will fall in line behind the party leadership and vote meekly and quietly for the next few months until the replacement is chosen in a special election. But this is kind of worrisome:

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 [...]

Federal records show Kirk registered as a lobbyist a decade ago. While Kirk would be banned from lobbying for two years after his appointment ends, he would retain Senate floor privileges, the honorific title "senator" and a coveted Capitol Hill parking space for life.

The Sunlight Foundation has lots more on Kirk's corporate connections. There are companies on the board of directors of which he sits which are currently lobbying Congress on matters related to health care reform, climate change, and financial regulatory reform.

Again, he'll fall in line, but the level of corporate capture in the highest echelons of the Democratic Party is astounding. I'm not surprised at the existence, just the scope.

Meanwhile, the legal issues behind this bill look fishy.

The Massachusetts Republican Party urged Secretary of State William F. Galvin to reject Patrick's request to make the legislation effective immediately, saying prior decisions by the Supreme Judicial Court showed the governor's power applied only when a law is subject to a public referendum. The party asked Galvin to at least seek an advisory opinion from the court [...]

Patrick has argued the state stood to suffer without full Senate representation before the special election campaign, but some fellow Democrats have joined Republicans in accusing him of a power grab.

"This is not an emergency," said Rep. Paul Frost, R-Auburn. "So however the governor is going to write a letter to the secretary of state, saying the Legislature didn't agree it was an emergency, but I do, I can't wait to see it."

I think this is generally good law and a model for how other states should approach Senate vacancies, but the Republicans could certainly try to hold this up under the emergency standard, and they may find a sympathetic ear in the courts.

...The Massachusetts GOP is seeking an injunction, based on the emergency standard. So far, no word from the courts.

MA-Sen: Paul Kirk For Appointment

Major Garrett sez that former DNC Chair and Kennedy family friend Paul Kirk will be named as the temporary Senator from Massachusetts tomorrow. Many expected Mike Dukakis to be the pick, but Kirk, as a former DNC Chair, is probably a much safer choice from the standpoint of following leadership. And the Kennedy family reportedly sought him out.

He'll basically be Roland Burris for a few months until Massachusetts elects a new Senator. Don't expect bold leadership from Paul Kirk.

...there is this troublesome bit, that the bill needs to be passed with a 2/3 vote under emergency rules in order to take effect immediately. Alternatively, Deval Patrick could call an emergency and sign the legislation, but that would probably elicit a court challenge and tie up the seating of any Senator. The bills, when passed, did not get a 2/3 vote, by the way.

Teddy's Replacement Coming Soon

The Massachusetts State Senate just passed the bill allowing for a temporary appointment to the US Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy. The Governor will sign and the Democrats will be back to 60 seats perhaps by the end of the week.

This is probably the best practice for Senate vacancies - a temporary appointment because of the disproportionate impact of losing one Senator out of 100, followed by a quick election within a few months. It ought to be the standard.

Most speculation on the seat has centered on former Governor Michael Dukakis, or someone with ties to the Kennedy family or Teddy himself, like a former staffer. At any rate, that vote will certainly be fairly Democratic.

Obviously this raises the possibility of demanding Democratic unity on allowing a final vote on health care to go forward, even if they don't approve of the final bill. There's the matter of Robert Byrd (who ought to resign and live the rest of his life in peace), but essentially, Democrats will have the votes to block a filibuster if they hang together. And if Harry Reid cannot figure out how to enable a vote the the overwhelming majority of his caucus supports, then he doesn't have any power whatsoever. Reid is still raising the possibility of reconciliation, but that's a bluff for Republicans. It's the Democrats in his own chamber who need the nudge, although perhaps reconciliation is a warning to them as well.

Uh-Oh

Robert Byrd is 91 and quite unwell. Ambulances raced to his house today because he got up too fast. Democrats may gain one seat in Massachusetts by the end of the week if the appointment law goes through, but Byrd has been in and out of hospitals for months and is rarely seen on the Senate floor.

Nobody wants to tell Robert Byrd to retire - he's been in the Senate since 1958 and he probably wants to die right there on the Senate floor. But for the good of the country he ought to resign and not have his illness affect the quality of life for millions of Americans. West Virginia allows for a temporary appointment, Governor Joe Manchin is a Democrat, and within a matter of days the Democrats could have 60 able-bodied members. But instead of that, and instead of coming up with a process where Byrd can vote by proxy, we are hampered with endless filibusters based on Robert Byrd's physical health, which I don't think was the founders' intentions.

One Step Closer To 60

Yesterday the Massachusetts House passed a bill that would allow Deval Patrick to appoint a temporary successor for Ted Kennedy until the outcome of a special election in January. The bill now moves to the State Senate, where Democrats have an enormous advantage as well. Republicans could hold up the bill through some procedural maneuvers, but they cannot stop it. The expectation would be that final passage could happen by the middle of next week. This would obviously be a huge boost to Democrats to have a consistent voting partner and a 60-vote majority in the Senate once again.

Regardless of the appointment process, there will be a special election, with a primary in December and a general election in January. With some of the big names on the Republican side begging off the race, the winner of the Democratic primary is highly likely to win the general. Right now the field on the Democratic side includes Attorney General Martha Coakley, Rep. Michael Capuano, and co-owner of the Celtics Stephen Pagliuca. Coakley, a statewide officer, has higher name recognition and thus a big lead. But Capuano is a pretty strong progressive.

By contrast, her main rival, MA-8 congressman Mike Capuano, has a ten year record on national issues. Basically it’s a record of being really, really liberal. He’s member 18.5 in the 111th House, he was 30.5 in the 110th House, 40.5 in the 109th, 10 in the 108th, and 8 in the 107th—firmly on the left side of the Democratic caucus. He’s the former mayor of Somerville, a dense walkable urban area, who likes to talk about mass transit, he’s pushing from the left on Afghanistan and Iraq, he favors single payer health care but says he won’t “let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

Capuano, recognizing that he needs to introduce himself to voters outside his district, has already put up an ad on statewide TV, and it's striking how hard he pushes his progressive credentials.



A Senator from Massachusetts needs to be as far to the left as possible - there aren't many states out there as blue, if any. Capuano looks pretty good to me; Coakley may be great, but she needs to reveal herself on the issues she hasn't faced as Attorney General.

60 Again Shortly?

We're getting closer to Massachusetts being able to appoint an interim successor until the special election that will be held January 19 fills the slot once held by Ted Kennedy. I didn't think Massachusetts lawmakers would be constrained by appearances on this one. Plus, they are fulfilling the expressed desire of the electorate to have two Senators, including one who shares Ted Kennedy's beliefs and policy positions.

By the way, the whitewash of Kennedy from a liberal lion into the great conciliator and compromiser who would have bargained away the public option in a second is truly insidious. Jed Lewison, who was there during the Medicare Part D fight, has some good thoughts on this over at Daily Kos. In short, Kennedy opposed the Medicare deal because it became an industry trough-feed at the end. Despite this, conservatives keep parroting this "compromiser" spin, particularly with respect to that vote.

The reason for Fox's lie couldn't be more obvious: they desperately want Democrats to cave on the core elements of health care reform, and they think that creating a false narrative about Ted Kennedy will make their wish come true.

Ted Kennedy probably wouldn't want us to pass meaningful health care reform solely to honor his legacy. In fact, of all the reasons health reform needs to be passed, that's probably not even on the list.

But Ted Kennedy's passion for health care reform does inspire us to achieve the goal of universal, affordable coverage. And the record shows us that despite his best efforts, Republicans cannot be trusted to be fair partners in the process of getting there.

More.

Not Really "Le Mieux"

We have a new United States Senator to replace Florida's Mel Martinez. He's the former chief of staff of the Governor who appointed him, who is also seeking the job in 2010.

Gov. Charlie Crist chose trust and loyalty Friday over Washington experience or potential political gain in choosing former chief of staff George LeMieux to replace Republican U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez.

State Rep. Jennifer Carroll, who was considered for the position, said Crist told her he is choosing LeMieux. LeMieux is Crist's closest political adviser and the governor's pick shows he wants someone who thinks like him to hold the Senate seat Crist hopes to win in the November 2010 election.

As LeMieux said after interviewing for the position: "I'm a Charlie Crist Republican."

Technically, this is a caretaker position, albeit one that lasts a year and a half. And I think it shows the pitfalls associated with gubernatorial appointments, especially in this case, where the Governor in question is running for the seat. Crist is basically putting in a sock-puppet, who can be expected to follow his wishes to a T. During Crist's primary with conservative Marco Rubio, we can expect LeMieux to protect Crist's right flank by voting straight down the conservative line. As soon as Crist wins the primary, LeMieux will get religion and start voting in a moderate fashion, to prove Crist's moderate bona fides. I'd almost guarantee it.

With the Kennedy situation still fluid, I think that a potential Massachusetts law would be the best of all possible worlds - a quick appointment because of the outsized importance of Senate representation, along with a quick-strike special election within 4-5 months. Certainly better that a Governor putting in his sock-puppet while running for the seat himself.

By the way, LeMieux is also a former and possibly current registered lobbyist, but he's also a Republican, so that's somewhat redundant.

Kendrick Meek, the Democrat running for Senate, came out swinging:

From the moment Senator Martinez announced his retirement, Governor Crist placed his ambitions over Florida's needs. Floridians require a Senator working to ease their economic pain and achieve comprehensive health insurance reform, not a political appointee who serves the monied special interests.

The Governor added another edition to his campaign team at taxpayers' expense. George LeMieux doesn't represent Floridians facing economic challenges - he represents privileged clients with expense accounts far removed from the realities Floridians are facing.

Governor Crist was afforded a high responsibility with this appointment. Instead, he treated this process like a mockery, politicizing his selection by flying around the state at taxpayers' expense, touring major media markets and drawing this selection out. Well respected Floridians with a wealth of elected service experience from Congressman Clay Shaw to Mayor John Delaney to various Hispanic leaders were in a position to hit the ground running if appointed, but that possibility is now nonexistent.

By appointing George LeMieux, Governor Crist's inner circle was rewarded with a U.S. Senate seat and Floridians are left lacking the representation they deserve.

I like the "Charlie Crist choose a Senator tour" that apparently accompanied this selection. And in the end, he put his campaign manager and chief of staff in the seat. That probably could have happened without the fanfare.

Yes, It's Hypocritical. Politicians Don't Always Care About That

The call to replace Sen. Kennedy with a temporary appointment is intensifying. Among the points I've heard bandied about by Democrats in the state is that Massachusetts cannot afford to be without representation for five months.

Um, pardon me, but wasn't Kennedy basically in a hospital bed for the past 18 months, off and on?

I don't think there's any way for Massachusetts Dems to justify changing a law they altered precisely to keep Mitt Romney from appointing a successor to John Kerry. So they... shouldn't justify it. We have an entire Internet meme called IOKIYAR - It's OK if you're a Republican - based on all of the hypocritical crap they've lodged at the country over the years. One for our side wouldn't really upset that balance.

What matters is getting the policy right. I believe Senate appointments that last for years, as we saw this year in New York and Illinois and Colorado and Delaware, are generally bad for democracy. I think a quick, or relatively quick, special election, within 4-5 months, while appointing a caretaker to represent the state in the interim, is probably a decent enough compromise. I wish all states would adopt such a measure.

What will be far more interesting is to see who runs for the seat. In addition to practically the entire Massachusetts delegation in the House (save Barney Frank, who probably has enough power where he sits already), you have former Rep. Joe Kennedy II, or even Kennedy's widow Vickie. Most of the members of Congress have been hoarding money while waiting for this opportunity, 25 years in the making, for a statewide Senate run. Marty Meehan, who left Congress last year to run Lowell University, has almost $5 million in his campaign account.

The Limits Of Comity

Even a "split-the-bill" strategy would require 60 votes for cloture on the more non-controversial items of health care reform. And as I noted, Republicans like Jon Kyl are objectively pro-discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions. Furthermore, expecting GOPers to go along with certain health insurance reform items after getting cut out of other elements of the bill is a fantasy. So those 60 votes will have to come from Democrats.

And all Democrats ought to stick with the wishes of their party rather than join a Republican filibuster. But there's one very sad detail - Ted Kennedy is fighting cancer. He's very sick. He didn't attend his sister's funeral. And while I believe he'd get wheeled in on a gurney if it meant the passage of his life's work, this letter shows that he's preparing for every eventuality. And here he runs up against Massachusetts state law.

A cancer-stricken Sen. Edward M. Kennedy has asked Massachusetts leaders to change state law to allow a speedy replacement of him in the Senate, fearing a months-long open seat will deny Democrats a crucial vote on President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

In a note to Gov. Deval Patrick and other state leaders, Kennedy wrote "it is vital for this commonwealth to have two voices speaking for the needs of its citizens and two votes in the Senate during the approximately five months between a vacancy and an election." [...]

Kennedy's letter acknowledges the state changed its succession law in 2004 to require a special election within five months to fill any vacancy. At the time, legislative Democrats — with a wide majority in both chambers — were concerned because then-Republican Gov. Mitt Romney had the power to directly fill any vacancy created as Democratic Sen. John Kerry ran for president.

I'm a bit all over the map on this. I actually think the Senate appointment process for vacancies is anti-democratic and wrong. But a five-month open seat does not serve the interests of Massachusetts residents either. Also, Kennedy, mindful of his cancer fight, could have resigned months ago. It's very sad that such choices have to be made given the process we have.

The real problem, of course, is that we have a system where everybody knows Ted Kennedy's position on health care - his committee staff helped write the Senate HELP bill - and he could easily indicate his position on elements of the bill from a hospital bed or through a staffer, but his specific presence on the Senate floor is required. The Senate is supposed to be about "relationships" and "comity" but the members cannot allow a colleague of 40-plus years the ability to make his preferences known given his medical condition. Ezra Klein adds:

That is to say, where Kennedy’s great friend Orrin Hatch would have voted to uphold a filibuster, now he will vote to shut it down, as that’s how the vote would have gone if Ted Kennedy were still alive, and it is neither decent nor small-d democratic to doom health care because the bill’s greatest advocate contracted incurable brain cancer.

Such a trade would not only be a grand show of respect for Kennedy’s life work, but it would uphold the outcome that Americans chose when they voted 60 Democrats into office in 2008. Conversely, if not one Republican can be found who feels enough loyalty to Kennedy to make sure that his death doesn’t kill the work of his life, then what are all those personal relationships and all that gentility really worth?

But Hatch was specifically asked this last night, and he ignored the question, saying that "The Democrats should be able to pass it. They have overwhelming majorities in the House, and they have 60 solid votes in the Senate." But they don't. Ted Kennedy is sick. He's barred from voting. And Orrin Hatch, supposedly this great friend of his, plays dumb about it. I guess blood - or the bloody shirt of partisanship - is thicker than water.

It shouldn't come to this at all - the filibuster was not designed to automatically require 60 votes on every piece of legislation, that's a recent development. But the next time you hear some member of the Senate club go on and on about "the great civility of this chamber" and "working with my esteemed colleagues on the other side," keep in mind that it's all a bunch of horseshit.

Is There One Moderately Sane Republican?

Kay Bailey Hutchison wants to be Governor of Texas. She was favored to win the Governor's race in 2010 over the current Governor Rick Perry, although Perry has moved ahead in the last few months. Resigning from the Senate to campaign full-time would doubtlessly raise her profile and give her a chance to regain the lead. So she announced that she would do just that, sometime in October or November. Texas has a special election requirement for Senate vacancies (though the Governor can appoint a temporary replacement), so there would be a May 2010 TX-Sen race.

And a day later, she turned that announcement into a threat??

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's message Wednesday was as simple as it was confusing: If Gov. Rick Perry does not quit his re-election race to give her a free run at the Republican gubernatorial nomination, she will quit the Senate to run against him.

In a bizarre series of interviews, Hutchison — who has been in the Senate for 16 years — said Perry is wearing out his welcome by wanting to win re-election so he can have 15 years as governor. And if he does not get out of her way, she will quit her job to take him out.

Wednesday morning Hutchison told a Dallas radio station that she planned to quit her Senate seat in October or November to challenge Perry.

Several hours later, however, she told reporters in Washington that her statements had been misunderstood and what she really wanted was for Perry to get out of the race.

“Nobody expected (Perry) to run for 15 years, and I think there's a chance that he wouldn't run because he would see how divisive it is and that he's trying to stay too long and that he can really help in many ways if he doesn't run, in which case I could then be able to stay in the Senate all the way to the end,” Hutchison said, according to Congressional Quarterly.

Who the hell does that? Perry is LEADING right now. Why would he want to accommodate her by leaving the race so she doesn't have to quit the Senate? Does she realize that Perry would get to name her temporary replacement? Does she realize that most politicians kind of like that kind of power? Does she realize that politicians don't usually quit campaigns to make it easier for their opponents?

Can ANYONE here play this game?

Senate Primary Challenges A Go-Go

With the second quarter fundraising out of the way, now is the perfect opportunity for candidates to jump in and announce their intentions to run. In Pennsylvania and New York, that's what we're seeing.

Joe Sestak's candidacy is the worst-kept secret in America, and he again vowed to run in an interview with the Wayne Independent.

A congressman from the Philadelphia suburbs will challenge U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter in the Democratic Senate primary.

In an interview with The Wayne Independent Wednesday morning, U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa.,confirmed his intention to run against Specter, a long-time Republican who switched to the Democratic party earlier this year.

“I am going to get into the race against Arlen Specter ... for senator,” said Sestak in his first media interview as part of a three-week tour through all of the Commonwealth’s 67 counties.

Sestak is a good campaigner and a smart politician and I expect him to do well. In fact, I predicted a victory last week.

Now there's another primary challenger, in New York State to go against Kirsten Gillibrand, the appointed replacement of Hillary Clinton. Carolyn Maloney will run.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney has decided to take on Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in the 2010 Democratic primary, refusing to bow to party leaders who want her to stay out, the Daily News has learned.

"She's definitely decided to run," said a senior Maloney adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity. "She's in it."

Previously, New York poohbahs like Chuck Schumer and the White House cleared aspirants out of the way. Maloney would not be moved. In general I think that's healthy. Gillibrand has a good voting record as a Senator, but I reject the appointment process as undemocratic and think that appointees should have to work for their position. With Ted Kaufman not running in Delaware, Roland Burris toast in Illinois, and this primary, 3 of the 4 appointees will either not run or have challenges next year, and Michael Bennet certainly ought to have one in Colorado.

They may be expensive, they can potentially be divisive, but they allow the voters a voice rather than having representatives anointed from on high. That's always a good thing.

NY-Sen: More White House Maneuverings To Stop Primaries

Carolyn Maloney represents most of the east side of Manhattan and Queens in Congress. She's been really good on women's issues and gay rights, but as a member of the Financial Services Committee and a Congresswoman from Manhattan, she gets lots of cash from Wall Street interests. Nonetheless, she has a decent record on the middle class and just shepherded through the landmark Credit Card Bill Of Rights reform. She's good but not great on labor rights or foreign policy. A good rundown on her record is here.

She wants to run for Senate to primary Kirsten Gillibrand. Both women could put their credentials before the voters and let them decide. But the White House doesn't want that, and they're trying to keep Maloney out of the race.

Vice President Biden this week sat down with Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) to urge her not to run for Senate.

Maloney has been making initial moves toward challenging Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in the 2010 Democratic primary, hiring public relations strategists and fundraisers in both Washington and New York.

It would be a primary national Democrats had hoped to avoid. Earlier this week, Biden sat down with Maloney in New York City and urged her not to run, according to a senior White House official.

"We've made it clear we're behind Sen. Gillibrand," the official said.

I intuitively understand why national Democrats want to avoid a primary. Money is finite and why have a bruising primary, etc. But that's just not democracy. The Senate appointments process, which should be abolished, allows a constituency of one to make a decision affecting millions. Senators should have to face the voters and earn the votes. I don't know who I would support in such a race - Gillibrand has been pretty decent since coming to the Senate - but the voters ought to decide. In the long run, it would be better for whoever wins to have their candidacies affirmed by the base of the party.

As for the White House, surely they have more to do than to stop Democrats from choosing their legislative representatives.

...Carolyn McCarthy, who's from Long Island and who people often confuse with Maloney, isn't running. So Maloney-Gillibrand would look to be a one-on-one race.

The Burris Clown Show Returns

I prefer to ignore the sad spectacle of Roland Burris, but this pathetic tape recording of the Illinois Senator pleading with Rod Blagojevich's brother to have the Governor seat him, and offering to "personally do something" for Blagojevich cannot really be ignored any further. He not only offered to raise money in exchange for the Senate seat, but he intimated that he would use his lawyer's name on some of the checks, which is a total violation of law. And while Burris never followed through and actually offered anything of value, he has had several months to disclose this new information, where he appears to be wrestling with getting around those restrictions.

This tape will actually get released, apparently, and MSNBC reported that Dick Durbin won't support Burris for re-election after this revelation. Big surprise, he's polling around 8%. But this does vindicate Durbin and Reid to an extent for wanting to block Burris in the first place. Clearly there was a taint to his appointment, as there are to all Senate appointments, in my view.

The 28th Amendment

It's hard to even write anything today because it will just pale in comparison to Jon Stewart channeling the rage of 10 million blog posts last night. But I have a responsibility to my legions of fans, so...

Let's talk the Senate appointment process!

Russ Feingold held a hearing this week on his proposed Constitutional amendment, to mandate special elections for all Senate vacancies, just as there are for House vacancies. With the spectacular flameout of the Blagojevich/Burris fiasco and other appointments handled poorly, there is no better time to get this done. And the number of appointments - 6 in the past two years - is robbing the people of their ability to choose their own representatives.

Mr. Feingold said he was motivated not only by the furor surrounding the disputed appointment of Roland W. Burris to the Senate by Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich of Illinois, since impeached, but also by the sheer number of appointees in the turnover after the election of President Obama.

“I really became troubled when I realized that such a significant percentage of the U.S. Senate was about to be appointed rather than elected by the people,” said Mr. Feingold, who will convene a joint House-Senate judiciary hearing on the proposal on Wednesday. “I think of it as a right-to-vote issue.”

At the hearing, Sen. Mark Begich testified to the personal experience in his family with this issue:

In October 1972, the Alaska Democrat’s father, Rep. Nick Begich, was declared missing along with House Majority Leader Hale Boggs, D-La., when their plane disappeared on its way to Juneau. It wasn’t until two months later that Nick Begich was declared deceased — and that was after he had been re-elected.

"Throughout this ordeal, Alaskans were officially without representation in the House of Representatives," Begich noted at a bicameral hearing of the House and Senate Judiciary committees. "But my recollection — and my review of news reports from that era — show no outcry for the appointment of a new congressman. Alaskans then, like Alaskans now, feel strongly that their elected representatives in the federal government should be exactly that — elected."

Special elections will remove the possibility for one corrupted politician to make a decision for millions of constituents and help restore democracy to the Senate. It's an obvious fix, so much so that even one of the appointed Senators, Delaware's Ted Kaufman, responded to the proposal by saying, "I think this is a good idea."

You can join Sen. Feingold as a citizen co-sponsor to what he is terming "the 28th Amendment".

The Last Days Of Burris' Bunker

The pressure is really hitting Roland Burris now. Gov. Pat Quinn speaks:

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D) on Friday called on his “good friend” Roland Burris (D-Ill.) to step down from the Senate and said the Illinois legislature should immediately take up a bill to require special elections to fill Senate vacancies.

Quinn declined to criticize the appointed senator, saying he would go down as a “great Illinois citizen,” but he said Burris has a “cloud over his head.”

He said Burris, whom he has known for 37 years, never should have accepted the appointment from embattled former Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) and that Senate business is too important right now to have a senator with so many questions to answer. He said Burris would be doing the state a service by stepping down.

Good for Quinn for calling on the legislature for a special election. Some would say that the Democrats would be unnecessarily threatening a blue seat, but I see no evidence of that with a not-Roland-Burris candidate. Burris was even leading in polls before this latest stuff broke, which means that generic Dem is favored over the leading Republican candidates, even with the ethical fallout from the Blagojevich situation.

Quinn is doing the right thing here. It's very hard for an executive to willingly give up their own power. Kudos. Now the Congress should finish the job by passing Russ Feingold's Constitutional amendment making this the law of the land.

I'm Smart! Not Like Everybody Says! Like Dumb, I'm Smart!

I am sad I missed Roland Burris' press conference:

Roland Burris is on TV giving a speech defending himself against allegations he lied about his role in being solicited and then trying to help raise money for Rod Blagojevich to help get the senate seat. And it's basically identical to a series of speeches Blago himself gave when he was swirling around the bowl: How dare you give me any crap for lying about that fundraising stuff when, my god, I just helped pass the Stimulus Bill, SCHIP and the Lily Ledbetter bill.

A-Rod's presser was less excruciating. Where do they get these guys in Illinois?

It was obvious from the moment anyone accepted an offer from Rod Blagojevich to be appointed that they had only a passing familiarity with ethics and standards. And now it looks like the dam is going to burst. The Senate Ethics Committee is opening a probe into Burris' possible perjury, and Illinois Rep. Phil Hare is calling for resignation:

“Senator Burris’ story has now evolved several times since he testified before the Illinois House Impeachment Committee in December. The only logical conclusion is that he is not being entirely straight with the people of Illinois.

“A cloud of corruption has hung over our state and its leaders for too long. The impeachment and removal of former Governor Blagojevich was a step in the right direction. But just as it looked like a new era in Illinois politics was possible, we suffer yet another setback. It is like a recurring nightmare.

“Given this latest revelation, I believe it is in the best interest of all Illinoisans that Senator Burris resigns. Our state and its citizens deserve the whole truth, not bits and pieces only when it is convenient.”

Citizens also deserve to have a full say in who is their representative in Washington. If Burris doesn't survive and removes himself from the Senate, there ought to be a special election. The new Governor can ask the legislature to approve one. This only highlights how broken the appointment process is for vacancies. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

Lynchian Bargain

It looks like New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch is inclined to go along with Judd Gregg, all but promising a Republican appointment to replace him if Gregg gets the top job at the Commerce Department.

"I have had conversations with Senator Gregg, the White House and U.S. Senate leadership. Senator Gregg has said he would not resign his seat in the U.S. Senate if it changed the balance in the Senate. Based on my discussions, it is clear the White House and Senate leadership understand this as well.

"It is important that President Obama be able to select the advisors he feels are necessary to help him address the challenges facing our nation.

"If President Obama does nominate Senator Gregg to serve as Commerce Secretary, I will name a replacement who will put the people of New Hampshire first and represent New Hampshire effectively in the U.S. Senate."

He doesn't outright say it, but he pretty much says that he won't stand in the way of Obama getting his man, and if he needs to appoint a Republican, so be it.

Even if it's a moderate, this makes little sense to me. Gregg would start the 2010 race with about as much of a chance as other Northeastern Senators Rick Santorum, Lincoln Chafee and John Sununu in recent cycles. Waiting until 2010 for a Democrat is pretty much the same whether he takes the Commerce Secretary job or not. So a hard-core economic conservative gets a job in the executive branch, in exchange for maybe an Olympia Snowe clone? This doesn't seem like a good trade, especially considering that Gregg would have to vote like a Snowe clone HIMSELF if he wants to keep his job in 2010.

If Lynch wants a successor "who will put the people of New Hampshire first," he can follow the strictures of the Feingold amendment and announce a special election for the seat. There's nothing stopping him from doing so. New Hampshirites would be right to demand this.

...good point by Brian Beutler:

Surely Gregg’s desire to replace himself with somebody who will often oppose his new boss’s agenda is evidence of his deep commitment to the administration, the cabinet, and the agency he appears poised to head.

...and it's Gregg. Unbelievable. This went from shrewd to stupid in a flash.

Backroom Deal

Several Republicans on the Sunday shows made it clear that Judd Gregg would not leave the Senate for the Department of Commerce unless he was replaced by a Republican. Here's a representative sample:

No change in the Senate's balance of power if New Hampshire Republican Judd Gregg leaves to become commerce secretary.

That's the word from the Senate's top Republican, Mitch McConnell. He says Gregg has assured fellow GOP senators of that.

McConnell says Gregg has promised he would be replaced by someone who would affiliate with other Republicans in the Senate.

This could just be bluster. In fact, Ben Smith reports that the White House is trying to get a guarantee from New Hampshire Governor John Lynch that he'll appoint a Democrat. Gregg is in no position to guarantee anything, as it's entirely Lynch's call. Another reason why we should have special elections so that the people decide and not one Governor. It may change the calculus for these appointments, but as they may not be made in the interest of getting the best person for the job ANYWAY, I don't think that's a major loss.

Miss Laura, a New Hampshire native, has more at Daily Kos, and she thinks that Lynch is far more likely to pick a Republican, perhaps one of the co-chairs of "Republicans for Lynch." There's a possibility in that case that the pick is slightly more moderate than Gregg and unlikely to run in 2010, but I don't know if that is enough to recommend Gregg for the job.

NH-Sen: Bank Shot To Sixty?

Josh Orton links to a Roll Call report saying Sen. Judd Gregg may be offered the Secretary of Commerce position.

There is a strong possibility that Barack Obama will choose Republican Sen. Judd Gregg to serve as his Secretary of Commerce, Democratic Senate aides tell the Huffington Post.

The move would fill a vacancy that has lingered since Gov. Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination, and would give Democrats in the Senate a 60th caucusing member, as the state's Democratic governor, John Lynch, would be appointing Gregg's replacement.

I'm slightly concerned about Gregg heading up Commerce, but it's something of a useless cabinet position anyway. It is in charge of NOAA and the National Weather Service and the Census, and is supposed to "promote commerce". Honestly, does this need to exist? Maybe a smaller-government Republican like Gregg would vote to dissolve it and sell off the more important agencies to other departments (NOAA and the NWS should be at Interior, no?)

Meanwhile, another Dem Senator is vital, for a host of reasons, evidenced by the zero-Republican support for the House stimulus bill. It would also line up Republicans to vote for Russ Feingold's Constitutional amendment eliminating Senate appointments by governors, but not until this appointment is made of course. I would even call on the Governor of New Hampshire to open this one up to special election, why not, Paul Hodes is well-positioned to slaughter anyone in the state.

I'm not sure Gregg would do it, but if he did, I think the pros outweigh the cons. Dean Barker at Blue Hampshire thinks Gregg looks out for himself just enough to pull the trigger.

Shrewd on the part of the Obama team.

Time To Get Special

Russ Feingold is taking the lead on calling for a Constitutional amendment mandating special elections for vacant Senate seats.

"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. In 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution gave the citizens of this country the power to finally elect their senators. They should have the same power in the case of unexpected mid term vacancies, so that the Senate is as responsive as possible to the will of the people. I plan to introduce a constitutional amendment this week to require special elections when a Senate seat is vacant, as the Constitution mandates for the House, and as my own state of Wisconsin already requires by statute. As the Chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee, I will hold a hearing on this important topic soon."

This is long overdue, and not just because of the Rod Blagojevich/Roland Burris fiasco, though that is an excellent example. The recent selection of Kirsten Gillibrand was not made by Gov. Paterson out of a desire to reflect the needs of his citizens, but for nakedly and admittedly political interests. He wanted to endear himself to women and to voters upstate. So he artifically narrowed his options. And then there's the issue of seat-warming, as we see in Delaware:

Seat-warming in Delaware: The governor of the First State chose Edward E. "Ted" Kaufman to fill the vacancy created by the election of Joseph R. Biden Jr. as vice president. Mr. Kaufman worked for Mr. Biden for 21 years, 19 as chief of staff. When he was selected, there were whispers that Mr. Kaufman would step aside in 2010 to allow Mr. Biden's son, who is Delaware's attorney general and serving in Iraq as a member of the Delaware Army National Guard, to run for the seat. Those whispers became audible talk when Mr. Kaufman announced that he would not seek a full term. While this is not the most egregious example of treating a Senate seat like a family heirloom, it comes close.

It's just undemocratic and wrong. Unfortunately, I'm not sure a Constitutional amendment is going to work. It may get the required 2/3 vote in the Congress, but then it must be ratified by 3/4 of the states. And in that process, governors must submit the amendment to their legislatures for ratification. Which means that a Governor would have to give the legislature the power to cut them out of the appointment process. Purely on grounds of self-interest, I don't see that happening, though it's an open question whether Governors can actually block the process. If they can't, they still wield power among state legislatures, who may not want to open up Senate seats to the rabble.