Once Again... Russ Feingold Steps Up To The Plate For Democracy

If there is one thing we learned from this flood of senatorial appointments it's that it's long past overdue that voters decide who senators should be, not governors. Governors, whether a sociopath like Blagojevich in Illinois or a hack like Paterson New York, have their own agendas. It rarely-- if ever-- coincides with the peoples' agenda, which-- at least theoretically-- is looking for the best possible representation for the states.

Everything about the Senate started out as anti-democratic and it has gradually become less and less so. The Senate represents states, not people. California's 37,000,000 people have two senators, just like Wyoming's 500,000 people-- and unlike Washington, DC's 600,000 (who have no senators or representatives-- not even if you count them as 5/8s of a person). Everything was done to insulate the Senate from "the passions" of the mob (i.e.- the voters)-- from the longer terms and higher age requirements to the myth that the Senate was the repository of "elite wisdom," to the way in which senators got their jobs.

Senators were chosen by state legislatures, not by voters (let alone universal suffrage). It wasn't until the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913-- following the examples set by Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Montana between 1906 and 1912-- that voters started electing senators nationwide. The Southern states, of course, bitterly opposed electing senators and fought ratification every step of the way. The problem with the 17th Amendment is that it also authorizes governors to appoint senators when there is a vacancy.

That's what's behind the three ring circuses in Illinois and New York and the thwarting of the will of the voters whenever a senator is appointed. And that's what Russ Feingold (D-WI), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, addressed today when he announced he would introduce a Constitutional Amendment that abolishes gubernatorial appointments to Senate vacancies.

"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."

Perhaps there will soon be a member of the House as committed to constitutional solutions to this kind of mess as Feingold. As we've mentioned before, the best man running to replace Rahm Emanuel in Illinois' 5th CD, is Tom Geoghegan and a few weeks ago Tom penned a NY Times OpEd that also got right to teh heart of the matter:

In 2009 four new senators will slip into office — all in violation of the Constitution, which requires a special election to fill a Senate vacancy. Colorado, Delaware, hapless Illinois and star-struck New York will have senators “elected” by a single voter, the governors who appoint them.

It may have been a while since many of us read the 17th Amendment, which was ratified in 1913. Its first paragraph replaced the indirect election of senators by state legislatures with “direct” popular election by the voters. The second paragraph, which you may have skipped in school, deals with vacancies. It states that when seats open up unexpectedly, governors “shall issue writs of elections to fill such vacancies.” The plain enough meaning is that the governor will issue an order for a special election. But for decades now governors have opted not to issue writs directing new or special elections. Why are they ignoring the Constitution? To increase their own power, of course.

The pretext being used is a legal “proviso” in the amendment that comes later in the second paragraph. It states: “Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”