November 2008
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Oct		Dec »
	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30

Originally posted: November 20, 2008

There must be a better way

Reader Lois Sorkin posted this question in the comments area:

Why not have the resigning senator name his own successor?

He is most likely to select a person whose views accord wit h his own and, therefore, with those voters who elected him to the position in the first place. Illinois happens to have a governor who belongs to the same party as the departing senator; but if we had a Republican governor, that would mean the governor of a state could possibly have the potential of shifting the balance of power in the U.S. Senate..

I agree that this particular method of replacement is especially lousy — it puts too much power in the hands of one person; a person whose interests and politics could be utterly unlike those of the departing senator.

Let’s consider the options:

State-wide special elections would be the most fair, but also by far the most costly way of choosing a successor.

Having the resigning senator pick his own replacement makes sense when the senator is resigning for a happy reason, but could be trouble if he or she were resigning under an ethical cloud. Also, this would be impossible if the senator died in office.

I kind of like the idea of allowing the state legislators of the departing senator’s party to caucus and choose a successor, perhaps in a series of run-off elections. It at least has the whiff of democracy.

If the senator were an independent, the entire legislature could meet in joint session to choose a successor.