Can Kirk vote in the Senate until the Brown/Coakley winner is certified?
Fred Barnes attempts to answer the question of what whether it would be legal for Massachusetts Democrats to make good on their pledge to delay Brown’s certification if he wins Tuesday’s Senate race, in order to allow previously-appointed senator Paul Kirk to be the 60th vote for cloture in the health care reform bill fight:
But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.
Yes, but we can safely say that Democratic attorneys are most likely saying the opposite. Funny how that works. And the Senate precedents cited in Barnes’s piece—that in previous cases involving back pay for senators, their term was deemed to have begun on the day of election—don’t really address the question of voting rights. For that, we appear to have no precedent at all.
The hypothetical situation is quite different from the recent Franken/Coleman election in Minnesota. That was a very close and contested election. Of course, Brown/Coakley may end up that way, as well, but Massachusetts Democrats are talking about the much more controversial question of delaying Brown’s seating in the event of a victory that is neither contested nor close, merely for the purpose of canceling the will of the people in their own state (and around the nation) and allowing health care reform to pass.
There is no precedent for that in American history, as far as I know, although we see it in various shakier republics and dictatorships.
In the Minnesota case, no one was allowed to vote until the contested election was settled. And Coleman was the previously elected senator from Minnesota. Kirk was only appointed to fill the seat by the governor of Massachusetts, the hated Obama-clone Deval Patrick. This would be a naked usurption of power by the Democrat Party that is transparently obvious.
Would they do it? We may not have a chance to find out; Coakley could win the election, and then the question would be moot. Tellingly, the Massachusetts Democrats are not speaking of delaying her certification, and my guess is that even if she’s only one vote ahead at the end of the day and there are absentee ballots still to be counted, they will be whisking her down to Washington for her swearing-in (although if they somehow decided to let Kirk stay in the Senate a while, the outcome would be the same—a vote for cloture).
But if Brown wins, and even if his lead is large and definitive, we may see a legislative power grab by the Democrats unprecedented in our lifetime, or perhaps in American history (any experts here to offer some parallels?).
.
I don’t think Sen. Paul Kirk can still vote in the Senate. Is there still enough time to do that? Even if it is done, it can be described as a race against time. And if the dems take other options just to ensure the passage of the health care bill, it can be labelled “devious” and will definitely be unparalled.
So let’s see: The GOP loves the Wall Street bonuses, Insurance companies, unborn babies, old white guys, racists, bigots, Palin (redundant), rich people (unlike yourselves), uneducated (much like yourselves), unAmerican radio pedophiles and hucksters, spirits in the sky, baby jebus (as if you could even walk in his footsteps), foreign governments (who happen to have oil), war and pillage (for countries who don’t have oil), and all things which contradict the nature and pulse of our America.
The GOP is a smallish cult populated with teabaggers and other such uninformed corporate shills (Dick Armey). The entire planet is laughing at your reverence for all things 16th century. And by the way; why are all your wives so fat and unattractive? Do you prefer them that way? Somebody loves you, don’t ask me why…
Jimbo, you do your side proud! I am humbled by the awesome logic of your impeccable argument.
Can any political party really be that short-sighted? I am afraid of the answer.
No single issue, including health care, is more important than preserving the integrity of the electoral process, honoring the will of the voters, and abiding by the letter and spirit of the Constitution. It’s stupid shortcuts like this, made in the heat of the moment, that start great socities down the road to perdition. The Roman Republic found what happens when you start to take shortcuts with democracy.
neo, I believe Jimbo was being ironic.
But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution
Ah! So the Repubs have nothing!
I kinda hope the Dems pull the Kirk stunt to pass ObamaCare. Having made a big bet on rope company stock, my ship will definitely come in.
What’s interesting about Jimbo–assuming he’s not being ironic–is how he provides evidence for Democrats becoming The Stupid Party. Martha Coakley’s campaign is Exhibit A in the case: Twin Tower adds, can’t spell Massachusetts, Curt Schilling a Yankee fan, rape smears, etc.
I hope there is some liberal, somewhere, who has the integrity to denounce the Jimbos on the Democrat side.
Occam’s Beard: I suppose it’s possible that you might be correct about our friend Jimbo, but I fail to see any indication of irony there. And note the use of the second person (yourselves, you) to refer to the dread Republicans.
Jimbo sounds as though he could be a speech-writer for the Croak-Lee campaign.
Rope companies–
Yale Cordage, Saco, Maine (privately owned; no relation to the University)
http://www.yalecordage.com/about-us
New England Ropes, Fall River, MA (Fall Rive!), owned by the Teufelberger company of Austria
http://www.neropes.com/
T.W. Evans Cordage, Cranston, RI
http://www.twevans.com/
Hard to see how to buy shares in any of these companies.
The Franken thing was transparently obvious, too. And that’s why Franken isn’t a senator today.
Nolanimrod: I never suggested that the fact that it was transparently obvious would stop it from happening. But it would be part of an accruing set of circumstances that could ultimately cause a backlash of a different sort, I believe.
There will not be a backlash until the Republicans start making clear and obvious ads referencing the backlash.
Republicans need to start making the case that Democrats are anti-democracy and hate filled individuals.
The ads need to call Democrats while simultaneously point out that the Democrats are like this and therefore do like YOU.
Don’t imitate the Dems 2004 Don Rickles style of campaigning, in which they informed 1/2 the country that the Democrats hated them. The ads need to make it clear that the Dem leadership isn’t like the majority of America.
Granted a “Democrats are X, not like you” campaign will angery the fanatical 20% of America that are Democrats 1st and Americans last, but the centrists and indepedents can be moved.
It’d be nice to see the Jimbo’s of the world held accountable for their “hate” speech.
EvilDave: yes, the Republicans must learn to be smarter about their publicity and ads. They could start by hiring Scott Brown’s team. It has been brilliant.
If Scott Brown wins, I wonder if John McCain could persuade his friend Joe Lieberman to abstain from voting until after Brown is seated.
No hate, just the truth. But since you revere Limbaugh, Palin, beck, et al…there simply is no bargaining with you.
It’s not my fault your little cult is a laughing stock. It’s not progressives fault the teabaggers took over your little racist group of uniformed, uneducated, and bigoted people. It’s your fault you want to live in the 16th century. Conservatives suck, and it’s not my fault they do…
neo, how nasty do you think this will get?
There are clearly people who will stick at nothing and say anything and try any trick and violate any law to get and keep power. They count on the existence of a huge number of people who are unprepared to understand that they have been nourished on a narrative that leads to catastrophic public policy and personal unhappiness…your circle dancers.
The very process of de-programming is certain to general huge emotional heat and plenty of bad behavior on both sides.
The rhetorical trajectory reminds me of the run up to the Spanish Civil War. People won’t be able to talk across the divide. I heard once that a relationship can survive anything but contempt.
In a couple of weeks, I’m going to a reunion that will include at least one very senior DC Democrat political operative and at least one veteran Republican. I’m afraid that words will be exchanged that will end a 30 year relationship with the former. If Brown wins, I strongly suspect this fellow will wig out; it will strike very close to home.
As I thought, Jimbo inhabits an irony-free zone.
Jimbo, if we are so awful, I’m surprised you want to hang around with us.
Yeah…McCain and LIEberman. If I think back, didn’t they get their butts kicked in some election recently? Oh yeah, the one where an educated and thoughtful man won the election – by a landslide. You are looking to these losers as your saviors? Yep, that sounds about right. What, Joe the not-plumber wasn’t available?
You folks suck, and it’s not my fault. Joe the Plumber? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa….
# Oblio Says:
January 17th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
As I thought, Jimbo inhabits an irony-free zone.
Jimbo, if we are so awful, I’m surprised you want to hang around with us.
Frankly, I am writing a book about how the dumbest and least effective people have taken over your party. Palin, Limbaugh, beck, Oreilly? These are your masters? These losers? Gingrich, McCain – both adulterers – these are your heroes? Larry Craig and Ensign? These are who you look to for guidance? Please look forward to my book due out in the summer. It will hit home to many on this blog.
Then, Jimbo, you are in the wrong place, barking up the wrong tree. The central narrative on this site is about how people change their minds. Most people who post here are refugees from the left or center-left. The are a high proportion of lawyers, academics, writers, and even Ivy Leaguers. It is not a site dedicated to defending the Republican Party, or Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh. You are arguing with a caricature that only exists in your imagination.
s/b “there is a high proportion…”
Neo, you were absolutely right. Jimbo’s post was such a pitch-perfect version of a cognitively-disenfranchised liberal that I presumed it was ironic. It can be hard to distinguish reality from satire when reading liberal posts.
Oblio, I’ve thought the same thing. There’s a further parallel: the Spanish Civil War erupted when the Reds in the Republican government overplayed their hand, thinking that the time was ripe to implement a socialist takeover a la Lenin.
Jimbo: are you sure you’re not a conservative plant? You are your own worst advertisement.
And if you are an example of the smartest and most effective people in the Democratic Party, I shudder to think what has become of it.
But I’ve been shuddering about what’s become of my former party for quite some time now.
I haven’t seen so much hate spewing since I last watched MSNBC.
Who knew Keith Ogremann posts messages on blogs under the pseudonym “Jimbo”?
“These are your masters? These losers? Gingrich, McCain – both adulterers – these are your heroes? Larry Craig and Ensign? These are who you look to for guidance?”
Dishonest, incompetent bblowhards, Hypocrites and left-wing fools; the Democrats, exemplified by the recently impeachable Bubba Clinton, Timothy Geithner, Tom Daschle, Edward Kennedy, John Edwards, Kevin Jennings, we all know how the list could go on and on and on, but I’ll just end with our own resident fool at the end, (two-bit) Jimbo. Like high oil prices are the cure for high oil prices, the cure for the democrats is the democrats. Scott Brown is the beginning of the end for the dems, Allen West 2010!
As someone with no little experience in these matters, it is crystal clear to me that the only book Jimbo is writing is in his head and the only one that will ever read it is Jimbo while meditating inside the smallest room in his house trailer.
If Brown wins, he needs to take the oath of office before a judge the very next day: he will need a fact on the ground like that to be in a better position.
Jimbo’s book:
Coming soon to the Remainder Table of the Mind, near you. . . .
Neo, this election WILL be contested even if Scott Brown has a double digit lead. Gives them a fig leaf not to seat him. It will work with the Jimbo’s of the country.
Can we all take guesses how old Jimbo is? I’ll start the bidding at 17.
Asking if it is legal is the wrong question – it is clearly not. The “best” I;ve heard is rank/file dems to look uncomfortable and say “Republicans would do the same thing” and then deflect to something else. No one with two brain cells to rub together thinks otherwise, it is obvious it is unconstitutional and it is obvious that if the Republicans or Bush were to do it what the reaction would have been.
The real question is can they get away with it. I dunno.
Firstly can they politically – probably kinda. It is clearly dishonest but so many figure they are that way anyway it doesn’t matter much. All they need is to have some person come out and say the sky if green and it is enough. In and of itself it isn’t anything special, but it is just another part of why Brown is doing as well as he is in arguably the most liberal area in the US.
Can they legally? Yes and no. Vote on it and then worry if it is constitutional. If it is unconstitutional the bill isn’t going to be un-passed, it is there and that’s the end of it. Worst case scenario is that it is found unconstitutional and no one gets punished (likely) – that is it is illegal but the law stands. It doesn’t even affect it for the next time it happens either. It may be clearly illegal but if there is no consequences besides being told “Bad” then they will do it again and again (and once that becomes standard political play both sides will happily participate).
Frankly our constitution was never designed to handle this level of out and out dishonesty. I do not think that the Founding Fathers ever really imagined this type of thing happening. Frankly even had it we are ignoring it so much now that it matters little as to what it says.
People ask why are the dems so confident and ignoring of the public and I think the above is why. There is the idea that this is their chance to get it all done and in the door. They each have the “herd” mentality that they will be the ones to survive (someone else is going to ate by the predator) and when the pendulum swings back to the dems then they can cinch it up. Brown is scary because it is one of the most protected members of the herd getting ate.
Can we all take guesses how old Jimbo is? I’ll start the bidding at 17.
17.01.
I assume we’re talking chronological age here.
> But if Brown wins, and even if his lead is large and definitive, we may see a legislative power grab by the Democrats unprecedented in our lifetime, or perhaps in American history (any experts here to offer some parallels?).
I believe, Neo, if you read up on the 1876 Presidential election (Benjamin Rutherford vs. Samuel Tilden), it’s often considered one of the more egregious ones — it’s one of two elections referred to as “The Corrupt Bargain”, and possibly the worst of the two (1824, Adams-vs-Jackson being the other)
Conservatives suck, and it’s not my fault they do…
Yeah it is, Jimbo. You created them, in your mind, as projections of your self. But look at the bright side: at least you’ll have an eternal enemy to vanquish, an omnipresent real one.
AVI:
Can we all take guesses how old Jimbo is? I’ll start the bidding at 17.
AVI, you may be on to something. Peter the Alaskan Kid , now a freshman at Georgetown, used to comment here when he was still in high school. On his own blog he admitted he commented on Neoneocon to stir up the wingnuts. But he did a much better job of it than Jimbo. He also made some nonpolitical comments. While one might suspect Jimbo of being a conservative plant, given his over the top comments, one would never have suspected that of Peter. Due to some combination of intelligence and maturity, Peter was at a higher level than Jimbo.
Obloodyhell,
Because you were talking about the 1876 election, I would assume you meant Rutherford B. Hayes vs. Samuel Tilden. However, in the controversial election of 1888, incumbent president Grover Cleveland ran against Benjamin Harrison. Apparently, you got those two names mixed up. (It’s an easy mistake.)
1888 was controversial because Harrison won the most electoral votes but lost the popular vote – only the third time in US history that had happened. (The next time was 112 years later in the election of 2000.)