Democrats Scrambling to Keep Filibuster Proof Majority

Before the death of long time Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy earlier this week, Democrats in the U.S. Senate held a 60 to 40, theoretically filibuster proof majority in the Senate. That could change if the Mass. lawmakers cannot change state law.

In most cases, Governors of a particular State has the responsibility of naming a successor to the Senate for that state in case the Senator moves on, steps down or dies in office. In recent years we have seen Governors make some sympathetic and interesting choices. In 2000, acting Missouri Governor Roger B. Wilson appointed Jean Carnahan to fill the seat of her recently deceased husband Mel Carnahan. In 2002, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura appointed Dean Barkley, his former campaign chairman to finish the term of Paul Wellstone. Earlier this Year in New York State, Governor David Paterson appointed Kirsten Gillibrand to replace incoming Secretary of State Hilary Clinton over Caroline Kennedy and others. The state of Massachusetts changed its succession law back in 2004, when Senator John Kerry, became the Democratic presidential nominee. The overwhelmingly Democratic state legislature strategy was to keep the Senate seat in control of the Democrats. Prior to the change the governor at the time, Republican Mitt Romney would have the opportunity to appoint a fellow Republican, to serve until the next general election had Kerry won the presidential election. Now current Massachusetts Governor, Deval Patrick is now maneuvering to give the power to appoint a replacement back to the Governor, instead of having to hold a special election. The push to swiftly name an interim successor intensified with Wednesday’s death of Senator Kennedy and Gov. Patrick and with other top state lawmakers indicating they are reluctant to leave the seat vacant for months there is strong support in favor of once again changing the state law. Kennedy, a fervent supporter of a national healthcare overhaul - perhaps his most cherished goal - would not want a Republican to win his seat and possibly hinder any effort for reforming the healthcare system. The late Senator asked state lawmakers to consider changing the law back in the form of a letter last week to Democratic in the Massachusetts State legislature. Why this option was overlooked when Governor Patrick initially took office in 2007 or not broached in the 2 ½ years he’s been in power remains a mystery. What is certain is that in this polarized political atmosphere such maneuvering could add to that polarization.