By Ian Donnis
Published April 16th 2008 in Providence Phoenix
SENATE SCRAMBLE: The mantra from US Senator Jack Reed, who’s up for reelection this year, is that he’s not about to take a Cabinet position in a Democratic administration. That hasn’t stopped state Senator Paul V. Jabour (D-Providence) from invoking Reed’s name, however, in explaining a legislative effort to change Rhode Island’s process for filling a US Senate vacancy.
As it stands, the governor has the power to fill such empty spots. Legislation sponsored by Jabour and state Representative David Segal (D-Providence) would require that a special election be held to fill US Senate vacancies, unless such a situation happened after July 1 of an election year. The vacancy in that instance would be filled through the normal election cycle.
In a statement, Segal says, “In the last 100 years, 151 US senators have take office without being elected. Incumbency affords great electoral advantages, and it is exceedingly likely that once appointed to office, a senator would readily achieve reelection. The only legitimate vehicle for ascension to a body as powerful as the Senate is popular support — only the passage of this legislation would ensure that the electorate determines its representative.”
Adds Jabour, “Here in Rhode Island, we have legitimate cause for concern about this issue, since Senator Jack Reed is a strong candidate for a Cabinet appointment. If that were to occur, allowing voters to choose a replacement would be a much more democratic avenue than having one chosen solely by the governor. Regardless of whether the governor is a Democrat or a Republican, he or she shouldn’t have the only vote in choosing who will represent our state in the US Senate.”
As it stands, the governor has the power to fill such empty spots. Legislation sponsored by Jabour and state Representative David Segal (D-Providence) would require that a special election be held to fill US Senate vacancies, unless such a situation happened after July 1 of an election year. The vacancy in that instance would be filled through the normal election cycle.
In a statement, Segal says, “In the last 100 years, 151 US senators have take office without being elected. Incumbency affords great electoral advantages, and it is exceedingly likely that once appointed to office, a senator would readily achieve reelection. The only legitimate vehicle for ascension to a body as powerful as the Senate is popular support — only the passage of this legislation would ensure that the electorate determines its representative.”
Adds Jabour, “Here in Rhode Island, we have legitimate cause for concern about this issue, since Senator Jack Reed is a strong candidate for a Cabinet appointment. If that were to occur, allowing voters to choose a replacement would be a much more democratic avenue than having one chosen solely by the governor. Regardless of whether the governor is a Democrat or a Republican, he or she shouldn’t have the only vote in choosing who will represent our state in the US Senate.”
Election Day '09 was a roller-coaster for election reformers. Instant runoff voting had a great night in Minnesota, where St. Paul voters chose to implement IRV for its city elections, and Minneapolis voters used IRV for the first time—with local media touting it as a big success. As the Star-Tribune noted in endorsing IRV for St. Paul, Tuesday’s elections give the Twin Cities a chance to show the whole state of Minnesota the benefits of adopting IRV. There were disappointments in Lowell and Pierce County too, but high-profile multi-candidate races in New Jersey and New York keep policymakers focused on ways to reform elections; the Baltimore Sun and Miami Herald were among many newspapers publishing commentary from FairVote board member and former presidential candidate John Anderson on how IRV can mitigate the problems of plurality elections.