Long time TMV author and friend Shaun Mullen makes an interesting proposal in the wake of the Blagojevich appointment of Roland Burris to the Senate. Is it time, as Shaun suggests, to “strip the power of filling Senate vacancies from governors and give that job to the voters, where it belongs?”
It’s not the first time, and I’m sure it won’t be the last, but I’m going to disagree with Shaun on this one. First, primarily on general principles, I’m hesitant to rush off in the direction of altering our Constitution every time there’s a hiccup in the system. Additional constraints on the powers of the states simply aren’t my cup of tea unless there’s simply no other way around the perceived problem. Having established the baseline framework of how our government operates, the document should primarily concern itself with ensuring the equal opportunities and rights of the citizens while preventing the institutionalization of abuses by the individual states. The more we ask it to dip into the specific nuts and bolts of day-to-day operations, the more trouble we’re asking for.
It’s also worth noting that the problem we’re addressing here is roughly as rare as hen’s teeth. Generally, a seated Governor would be someone who has earned the faith and trust of the voters as demonstrated during their election. The need for them to fill a Senate seat by appointment is at least as rare as Governors being removed from office for malfeasance. The odds of the former happening during the brief window while the latter is playing out, as currently unfolding in Illinois, are remote beyond belief. It doesn’t seem to be the type of constant danger which would require amending our founding documents.
There is also the matter of expense and operations to consider. Holding elections not only requires a lot of time and effort, but they cost money. Somebody has to pay for the extra elections. And if we’ve learned anything by now it is that, when the phrase “somebody has to pay” is invoked within a country mile of anything to do with government, we can be fairly sure who the “somebody” in question will be. Further, turnout for special and off-year elections tends to be dismal and the will of the people is not expressed as fully. It’s hard enough getting people out for the regularly-scheduled, “big ticket” elections. And if we’re this worried over the rare case of a Blagojevich situation, what if a Senator resigns, then their replacement is caught celebrating with a hooker after their victory speech, and their replacement is so excited about the new job that they drop dead of a heart attack? That’s going to get pretty expensive and time consuming.
While on that subject, the U.S. Constitution doesn’t even mandate Governors to do this. It simply allows it as an option, as detailed in the 17th Amendment. (Emphasis mine)
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: 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.
If the people of Illinois no longer wish the Governor to have this power, they are able to change it to mandate special elections through their representatives. In fact, they almost did so two weeks ago, but chose not to. I think each state should retain the option to handle this as they see fit, particularly given the expenses and logistics involved. Rushing to change the system over an anomaly such as Blagojevich could well be a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.