Will New York go the special election route?
posted at 12:15 pm on January 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Republicans in Illinois couldn’t force the legislature to change the law and require a special election for Barack Obama’s empty Senate seat, and impeached governor Rod Blagojevich ended up appointing an insider instead. In New York, Republicans want to strip Governor David Paterson of that same power, and they may have more leverage with which to succeed. What they lack, however, is time:
Republicans in New York’s Legislature are pushing for a special election to fill the expected vacancy in the U.S. Senate instead of allowing Democratic Gov. David Paterson to make a unilateral appointment through a secretive process.
The efforts, however, are by traditionally powerless minority conferences of the Assembly and Senate and face a near impossible timetable to even get the bills to floor debates before Paterson chooses Hillary Rodham Clinton’s successor from a field of Democrats including Caroline Kennedy and Andrew Cuomo.
Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, a Schenectady Republican, noted specifically that Kennedy, the perceived front-runner, has no record in elected office and her positions on public policy are largely unknown.
“We need an election, not a coronation, to ensure our next U.S. senator reflects the will of the people,” Tedisco said.
The GOP in New York do not control either chamber of the legislature, but they have more influence in Albany than the nearly-impotent GOP in Illinois does in Springfield. The vacillation of Paterson on the appointment helps, especially with a new poll out showing that Caroline Kennedy continues to lose support from voters for the appointment. The disaster of her press relations in the last two weeks may have awakened a desire in the electorate for a popular vote rather than an appointment, which can only help Republicans.
Jazz Shaw says that the string of Democratic scandals could also boost momentum for a special election:
The appointment system is in place for emergency situations and ideally would only occasionally result in a temporarily appointed official. But New York has been reeling under a series of scandals, combined with Clinton exiting for greener pastures and our election laws have created a “perfect storm” of vacancies where appointments are more plentiful than elections. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is still being considered for the Senate seat and if he is chosen we will have a Governor, a Comptroller, an A.G. and a Senator who were not elected, along with a Lt. Governor’s office which by law will remain empty until 2010. In fact, under that scenario, the only elected statewide official in New York will be Chuck Schumer for the next two years.
Tedisco and the minority Republicans have raised an interesting issue. All of this is happening properly under existing law, but it’s doubtful that the authors of these laws ever anticipated having this many people in the state’s highest positions of power at one time without ever facing the choice of the voters to place them there. Perhaps it is time to take a fresh look at the process, evaluate the costs of special elections and put the selection power back more firmly in the hands of the voters.
That does present a rather ugly picture for New York. They probably haven’t had that many appointed leaders since colonial times. To be fair, Paterson was elected as Lieutenant Governor and succeeded through Eliot Spitzer’s resignation, but Jazz’ point remains germane. No one voted for Paterson to be governor, and having a full slate of appointments rather than elected officials calls into question whether New York can claim to have a representative government at all.
I’d bet that Republicans won’t succeed in pushing through a change in time for this particular open seat, but expect that in itself to become a campaign issue in 2010. State legislatures around the country should review how empty positions get filled — and they should look hard at limiting the power of appointments and lean back towards popular elections instead.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
With such special candidates?
As in “short bus” special?
Of course they should.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Will New York go the special election route?
Why not, they’ve been going the Special Olympics route for years.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Interesting thought…but either way, I think it’s a slippery slope when we start stripping governors of their appointed powers in this case. Sure, Patterson wasn’t elected governor, but he succeeded Spitzer in the proper manner.
I say, even as a Republican, let the chain of government stay at the status quo. There will be another election soon enough.
JetBoy on January 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
What? No Coronation?
Kini on January 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
And another opportunity to vote for one corrupt, incompetent, unqualified Democrat or another.
Why’d we ever get rid of the monarchy?
Appointing inbred, addled, worthless jackass aristocrats for life makes a lot more sense than trudging to the polls to elect them every so often.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Depending on how he sees running with the appointed senator in 2010 would affect his re-election bid, Patterson might actually go along with the idea of a special election, if it means not having either the Kennedy or the Cuomo sides angry at him for the next 18 months (though New York’s GOP chances in ‘10 will depend on large part if the public thinks the Democrats are screwing things up at the national level, since that gives state Dems no one in Washington with a Republican label to dump off their problems on).
jon1979 on January 14, 2009 at 12:35 PM
No risk of a GOP candidate winning there, unless Rep. King can get Princess “You Know” to talk alot.
Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM
But Princess “You Know” Kennedy has her name and family, plus early support of “The One” to help her on this.
Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM
kudos to the NY GOP for showing some sigs of life – -as compared to far too many state gops [lookin' at you MN!] who seem content to simply wander in the wilderness listlessly …
Buckaroo on January 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM
“Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM”
perhaps, but the question becomes, are ny voters as moronic as mn voters?
Buckaroo on January 14, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Only in New York! The Replacement’s Replacement Choice;
http://conservativewomenunited.blogspot.com/2009/01/replacements-replacement-choice.html
Done That on January 14, 2009 at 12:39 PM
How about a deathmatch?
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM
A special election? That would be so unfair to Sweet Caroline! She’s supposed to have the Senate seat handed to her. It’s hers by divine right!
t.ferg on January 14, 2009 at 12:46 PM
pipe dream. don’t you people know how albany works? if you’re the minority in the chamber, you might as well not show up for work.
ernesto on January 14, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Thunderdome!
VACalbear on January 14, 2009 at 1:24 PM
I was going to say, “Sure! Let the People decide! There will be no chance for vote-fixing and all, that way.”, but I then remembered
ourthe President-Elect (D-Hamas) and Stuart Smiley, (D-SNL)….dmh0667 on January 14, 2009 at 1:28 PM
“Two go in! One comes out”
pseudonominus on January 14, 2009 at 1:37 PM
A special election will only legitimize Kennedy. She’s the biggest name right now and she has the most money, so she’ll win the election hands down. There’s no Republican that can win, unfortunately, because there aren’t any. None of them have name recognition. Paterson should just appoint her and get it over with.
kevinhannigan on January 14, 2009 at 1:46 PM
That’s not good enough.
She shall ascend into heaven and be seated at the right hand of Great Leader.
So as it is been written and so shall it be.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 2:01 PM
All of you hear trash talkig NY voters.
Screw you.
ThePrez on January 14, 2009 at 2:06 PM
Come on Buckaroo! They elected a carpet
muncherbagger like Hillary!Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 2:12 PM
What he said.
I don’t see any of you “high and mighty” bunch strapping on muskets to rebel against the Blue Tyranny, either. Just a whole lot of drum-and-fifing.
There’s groundswell that oppose Caroline and her appointment will damage the Dems in NY. Dems need independents, even here; “governance by default” is not the way to net them. We’re taxed to the gills already. I might be overenthusiastic but the dems are looking shifty, shady, demanding, and thoroughly un-Democratic. The GOP has cards to play, for sure.
LibertyBoyNYC on January 14, 2009 at 2:42 PM
There are hardly any comments to this post, because it really doesn’t matter. We’ll get another socialist in the Senate regardless.
Christian Conservative on January 14, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Republicans don’t actually think they have a chance to win the seat do they?
angryed on January 14, 2009 at 2:43 PM
Rudy for Senate?
Steve Z on January 14, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Won’t happen. He’s been
vilifiedattached to Bush and the GOP.And what a shame that is. Rudy wanted a 3rd but Bloomie said “nah-ah”. Now Bloomie wants a 3rd term; his only achievements have been a $400 property tax rebate [soon to be revoked] and 3-1-1. Besides those unremarkable accomplishments, he’s just kept the chair warm, in spite of all that read to the contrary.
LibertyBoyNYC on January 14, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Nurse Bloomie banned transfats and smoking, he is an American hero for the ages.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 2:56 PM
As a New Yorker the Bench for the GOP here is thin, the only advantage, the Democrats are just as lame but win as a force of habit.
rob verdi on January 14, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Florida and Minnesota should have a special election, with extra-large print, improved lighting, and aides to help mark ballots.
JiangxiDad on January 14, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Or they could just send the Minnesota Democrats to the polls, so they can all get a good kick in the ass for sending Al Franken to Congress.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 3:40 PM
If he really cared so much about our lungs, he would stop blowing smoke up our asses.
LibertyBoyNYC on January 14, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Obama’s Surgeon General assures us that that’s perfectly safe.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 4:14 PM
…which is, of course, a pretext to the upcoming EPA “greening” of our carbon-emitting powerplants. Divert the smokestack output directly up the constituency’s collective wah-zoo, thus capping carbon emissions. Save the world, bend over, here comes the Left.
LibertyBoyNYC on January 14, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Good thing they’re all hopelessly gelded impotents, otherwise it could be painful.
NoDonkey on January 14, 2009 at 4:32 PM
The Republican position in New York is actually very strong in this regard, partially because the Illinois fiasco muddied the waters for the appointment process.
Regardless of how clean his selection process may theoretically be, you’d think Patterson would have enough sense to know that he had to publicly demonstrate some measure of consideration of input from others — in other words, demonstrate some deliberative process — or else it would automatically look suspect, simply because it was done in secret!
But his office is already is on the defensive, as one State official is now even publicly claiming Patterson may be violating state law by keeping it secretive!
Secondly, the 17th amendment to the United states Constitution makes it absolutely clear that the preferred method of selection is through the ballot box. The Republicans in New York can and should hammer away at that, more so than their counterparts in Illinois did.
It provides, in part:
Finally, they could even point to the Supreme Court decision of Powell v. McCormack the landmark case out of New York, which became part of the undoing of Harry Reid’s initial attempt to block the Burris appointment.
That whole decision was underscored by the fact that Adam Clayton Powell had been elected to the seat in Congress, and had absolutely nothing at all to do with honoring a temporary appointment.
Where, one wonders, would one go looking for support for honoring an appointment over an election? Surely not in the Constitution, or the decisions interpreting it!
The real reason Reid was trapped was because of the allegations regarding race, and the fact that if they had refused to seat Burris, they feared there would have been impetus anew for a special election in Illinois.
The New York Republicans could very comfortably take their battle cry from the conclusion in Powell:
Trochilus on January 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM
test
Kevin M on January 14, 2009 at 9:04 PM
As a practical matter, New York hasn’t had a Senator since Al D’Amato. I can wait for Rep. Pete King or Rudy.
diogenes on January 14, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Comment pages: