Why should a governor have the power to substitute his or her judgment for that of the voters and decide who shall represent them in the U.S. Senate? Should not the people, or at least their elected state legislators, have their voices heard?
In 1972 Governor Edwards (D) of Louisiana appointed his wife to fill Senator Ellender's seat. When Senator Murkowski (R) became governor of Alaska in 2002, he asked his daughter Lisa to complete his term.
When Senator John F. Kennedy (D) became President in 1961, he enticed the governor of Massachusetts to have his college roommate, Benjamin Smith, succeed him and hold his seat until his younger brother Ted could run for it. When recently Vice President Biden’s senate seat became vacant, the governor of Delaware gave the position to one of Biden’s former staffers, allegedly with the understanding that he would hold it until the Vice President’s son could seek it for a full six-year term.
The Democratic majority of the Massachusetts legislature stripped Republican Governor Mitt Romney of the power to appoint a successor for Democratic Senator John Kerry when in 2004 it became alarmed that Kerry might be elected president and the governor might give the position to a Republican.
Illinois Governor Blagojevich was arrested and charged with trying to sell the Senate seat vacated by Senator Obama. He promptly countered the accusation against him by appointing a person to the Senate whom he had not asked for favors. The move, however, did not prevent the Illinois legislature from impeaching and deposing him for corruption.
The history of the filling of U.S. Senate seats by state governors shows that such appointments are not only undemocratic but also subject to abuse. At times, Senate seats have been treated like heirlooms.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 34 states provide for the governor to fill vacant Senate seats. California and New Jersey allow governors to call special elections. Hawaii, Utah, and Wyoming require that the replacement be of the same political party as the departing senator. Only Arizona requires a special election for all vacancies and does not allow any temporary replacements.
The Seventeenth Amendment, ratified in 1913, transferred the selection of senators by the state’s legislature to statewide popular election. It also provided a contingency provision enabling a state's governor, if authorized by the legislature, to fill a Senate vacancy until either a special or regular election for a successor can be held. According to the U.S. Senate's official website, there have been 174 men and women appointed to fill vacant seats in the Senate. Of that total, 55 have subsequently been elected to the seat, 55 were defeated, and 64 chose not to run or were unable to run.
The opponents of a special statewide election for Obama’s vacated U.S. Senate argued that a state-wide election would be too great a burden upon Illinois’ taxpayers. They projected the cost at between $30 million to $50 million, $16 million for Chicago alone.
Yet, there is a less expensive and more democratic solution possible: providing by constitutional amendment that Senate vacancies be filled from among the petitioning candidates by a vote of the state legislature. Governors like Blagojevich would than not face the temptation to extort favors for vacant Senate seats.