HolyCoast: Massachusetts Infighting Over Kennedy's Seat
Follow RickMoore on Twitter

Friday, August 28, 2009

Massachusetts Infighting Over Kennedy's Seat

Some Democrats in Massachusetts are inviting charges of hypocrisy and hyper-partisanship as they push an effort to change a law to benefit a Dem governor that was enacted in 2004 to restrict a GOP governor:
The question of how to fill Mr. Kennedy's seat is vexing Democrats. In 2004, Mr. Kennedy supported a special election rather than a gubernatorial appointment. Yet more recently, he wrote to Mr. Patrick and legislative leaders, urging that Massachusetts give the governor the power to appoint an interim successor.

Mr. Kennedy wrote that the governor should receive "an explicit personal commitment" from the appointee not to become a candidate in the special election. Mr. Patrick has supported the idea, and brushes aside concerns that Democrats were being inconsistent: "Massachusetts needs two voices in the United States Senate," he said this week.

In 2004, Democrats took the opposite tack. When some Republicans complained of the cost of a special election, Democratic Rep. William Straus said such reasoning might have been used in a "totalitarian country" and that "one person, whoever happens to be governor, will not make the decision for you."

In an interview Thursday, Mr. Straus stood by his words, saying he recently heard from many other Democrats who feel Mr. Patrick is making a mistake.

Mr. Straus said there always will be a pressing issue in Washington that seems more important than having an election. "We need to hold ourselves to the higher principles of democracy," he said.

Massachusetts state Sen. Brian A. Joyce, a Democrat who headed the election-laws committee in 2004, agreed. "If we were to allow an appointment, it would be wholly undemocratic," he said. "When you cut through the rhetoric on both sides, it's pure partisan politics."

Earlier this year, State Rep. Robert Koczera, a Democrat, introduced a bill to restore the governor's senate appointment powers. In 2004, he supported stripping Mr. Romney of the power to appoint a replacement senator.

He said he was against the idea in 2004 because he thought Mr. Romney's replacement would be able to run in the special election. Under Mr. Koczera's proposed bill, the replacement couldn't run.

State Rep. Frank Smizik, a Democrat, also backs an interim appointment. "I strongly believe in the electorate's deciding the election of our officials," he said. "However, Massachusetts should have a vote on the important issues like health care and global warming. To not do so would be cutting off your nose to spite your face."

Massachusetts Republicans pledged to make the most of the Democrats' reversal in coming elections. "If legislators go through with this, they are gigantic hypocrites," said Jennifer Nassour, chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party. "There is no other way to label them."

This is all about health care...period. Democrats, desperate to put some sort of silver lining on Kennedy's checkered legacy, want to pass Obamacare and give Kennedy some of the credit. Losing a reliable liberal vote makes that tougher and it's pretty clear that they'll do anything they can to appoint some lefty placeholder in the position whose only job will be to vote "AYE" when his name is called on the Obamacare bill.

1 comment:

Cato said...

Once again proving there is no higher ground in politics. The special powers republicans voted for Bush fell to Obama. Sauce for the goose, right? Unless you're a bold enough fraud to alter the rules every time they turn against you. Behold those frauds!!