With the death of Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy, Massachusetts finds itself with one senator in Washington. The state law is that an election will be held 120 to 165 days after the seat is vacated so the citizens of Massachusetts can choose their new senator.
Prior to his death, Senator Kennedy and his associates were trying to get the law changed. What he wanted was the governor to have the ability to appoint a short term replacement to the senate seat until the special election, thus insuring Massachusetts of total representation.
Sounds good and fair. Of course there are some key votes coming up, especially on Health Care Reform, one of Kennedy's key causes for years. I imagine, though I do not know for a fact, that the Senator or one of his associates, provided the governor with a short list of names of those he felt were "qualified" to replace him for the short haul.
Yesterday many of the TV pundits offered the view that the Massachusetts legislative will probably vote to amend the state law and the appointment of an interim senator will be allowed.
Since Kennedy was in office 47 years, and Kerry has a good number of years as well, I guess the Democratic machine of Massachusetts never foresaw this day coming.
The question is, should state law be changed just because the leader of a political dynasty wants it done? Before the Massachusetts legislature amends and /or changes state law, should a referendum be sent to the people of Massachusetts so that they can decide the procedure they want to follow, rather than leave it in the hands of the politicians in Boston who owe favors to various special interest groups?
I think the voters of Massachusetts need to be part of the process of changing this law.
What's your opinion?
Elected officials work for the the people, not vice-versa.
Its Common Sense
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment