Dukakis seen as possible Senate replacement if Kerry tapped for State

[Freddie Stubbs]

Source: The Hill

Former Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, the 1988 Democratic presidential nominee, may be headed back to the political spotlight as he’s considered a likely interim replacement for Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).

President Obama is set to tap Kerry to succeed Hillary Clinton as secretary of State, according to media reports.

This means Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) needs to find someone to fill Kerry’s seat until a special election can be held in the late spring or early summer.

Dukakis, who is 79, has remained politically active. He campaigned for Sen.-elect Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) this fall and teaches at Northeastern University.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/273151-dukakis-seen-as-possible-senate-replacement-if-kerry-tapped-for-state

[BootinUp]

1. cool. nt

[WI_DEM]

2. Wouldn't it be better to appoint somebody who actually would be the Senator

at the time of the special election? That is my thinking anyway.

[plethoro]

8. This is the best consideration, Wi_Dem. But I

didn't agree with the Kerry pick so I'll leave it at that.

[karynnj]

16. Maybe not - that person would possibly be forever seen as Patrick's choice,

not the voters' choice. There are several Democrats who are reported to have been interested. Selecting one over the others may seem almost undemocratic. I think being an incumbent helps, but is that true of an incumbent with only a few months there. Not to mention, consider the distraction getting set up in DC to actually do the job - even if just moving from the House to the Senate - would have on the ability of the person to campaign.

[Mass]

20. Patrick has been consistent in saying it was not his job to choose the MA Senator.

It was up to the people to elect this person.

Anyway, if Markey or somebody like him run, they will have as much or more name recognition as a caretaker senator who will be there for 5 months.

[karynnj]

38. Completely agree - you said it far better than I could or did

[julian09]

46. That is the opposite of Niki Haleys' position, which is the sensible one.

Patrick is not choosing the senator in Mass, the voters will in special election. Maybe he wants a weak candidate so he can run himself in 2016 against Brown. Patrick is probably sorry he promised, he would finish his term.
Markley didn't want it in last special election, why this time. Well, he's up on the red sox roster, that should help. Whoever temp would be wiil have a few votes by the time the special election happens, wouldn't hurt.

[FailureToCommunicate]

21. I believe the pretzel logic current law is that the appointed person can NOT run for the

office. That's why Paul Kirk was put in to fill Ted Kennedy's seat. And then of course Coakley ran, and lost to Brown.

It's kinda crazy, but I believe that is the way the legislature and the Governor laid it out.

But I am not too worried about Scott Brown winning again. Someone strong like our great Rep. Ed Markey will likely run...and the great team that got Elizabeth Warren elected would come out in force again because MUCH of the energy to get her elected came from wanting to make sure Brown didn't. The voters know a lot more negatives about Brown now. He's damaged goods. AND the Koch Bros may not be so ready to throw millions at him this time around.

[brooklynite]

32. Not how I read the law...

PART I
ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
TITLE VIII
CHAPTER 54
Section 140

Section 140. (a) Upon failure to choose a senator or representative in congress or upon creation of a vacancy in that office, the governor shall immediately cause precepts to be issued to the aldermen in every city and the selectmen in every town in the district, directing them to call an election on the day appointed in the precepts for the election of such senator or representative. The day so appointed shall not be more than 160 nor less than 145 days after the date that a vacancy is created or a failure to choose occurs. Filing a letter of resignation creates a vacancy under this section, even if the resignation is not effective until some later time, but the date of the election to fill a vacancy under this section shall be after the resignation is effective.

(b) If a vacancy under this section is created after February 1 of an even-numbered year, the governor shall not issue the precepts required by subsection (a), except as subsection (c) provides for a vacancy for senator.

(c) If a vacancy is created for senator in congress after April 10 of an even-numbered year, the governor shall issue precepts under this section, unless section 152 requires that office to appear on the biennial state election ballot in that year. If this section prevents issuance of precepts for senator, the office shall appear on the biennial state election ballot in that year. If a vacancy for senator is created after April 10 of an even-numbered year, but on or before the seventieth day preceding the regular state primary, the precepts shall appoint the day of the regular state primary and the biennial state election for holding the special primary and special election required by this section.

(d) If at the time a senator or representative in congress is elected at the biennial state election, there exists a vacancy in that office, the senator or representative shall also be deemed to have been elected to serve out that vacancy.

(e) A senator elected to fill a vacancy under this section shall serve for the remainder of the unexpired term.

(f) Upon failure to choose a senator in congress or upon a vacancy in that office, the governor shall make a temporary appointment to fill the vacancy; provided, however, that the person so appointed shall serve until the election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy pursuant to subsection (a) or (c).

All this says is that the appointee serves until the Special Election is held; doesn't say anything about the appointee being ineligible to run.

[FailureToCommunicate]

36. But it IS how Gov. Patrick got the legislature to agree, so unless he changes

his mind and Beacon Hill, it is effectively the way it stands:

From AP:
"During the 2010 special election - prompted by the death of longtime Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy from brain cancer - Gov. Deval Patrick said he would only appoint someone as interim senator if they agreed not to run in the special election, and he appointed former Democratic Party chairman Paul Kirk.

Under current law, if Kerry resigns Patrick would appoint an interim senator to serve until a special election could be held.

Asked recently if he would seek the same promise if Kerry stepped down, Patrick said it was too soon say.

Patrick has said he would prefer a system where he could appoint someone to serve until the next statewide election in 2014, but said there's no appetite on Beacon Hill to change the law."

[JI7]

48. Coakley would have easily won if she just campaigned and not made stupid

comments about how she already had this.

[FailureToCommunicate]

54. Many of the campaigners felt they were working harder then she was. Plus it was January and

nobody is motivated much to vote in January in New England.

[brooklynite]

3. Poor choice...

...no objection to his legislative abilities or his political philosophy, but this seat needs to be filled with someone who can hit the ground running to win the Special Election in July; someone who 1) lost to George Bush Snr and 2) has been out of electoral politics for 25 years isn't the optimal choice. Remember what happened when Walter Mondale was put into the Election to replace Paul Wellstone?

[Jackpine Radical]

27. That's exactly what I thought until

I read #21 above.

[brooklynite]

33. See my #32

[Marrah_G]

52. I'm hoping Mike Capuano will run again

[XemaSab]

59. Kerry has seniority

Dukakis might not have that same legacy in the senate, but he's an elder statesman of the party.

I would imagine that someone else would run for that seat in the next election.

We could do a lot worse.

[patricia92243]

4. Bad Decision. Hope minds are changed - and soon> n/t

[CreekDog]

5. why is it a bad decision? it's a temporary appointment until new candidates win a special election.

do you understand?

and if you think something is a bad idea, why don't you tell us why?

[bigdarryl]

6. OH GOD!!!!! can't they find any young bloods ALRIGHT KENNEDY'S!!!!!

[cstanleytech]

47. What about Joe Kennedy? Doesnt he qualify?

[cosmicone]

7. Caroline Kennedy would have been better

any Kennedy family person actually ... to defeat Scott Brown easily.

[DonViejo]

12. Except she doesn't live in MA nt

[Nye Bevan]

42. She was an embarrassment when under consideration for Hillary's replacement.

Some of her interviews were positively Palinesque.

[Jackpine Radical]

44. That's the vague impression I retain from then.

Like, she was about as deep as a kiddie wading pond on political issues.

[blueclown]

9. He would be great for the Senate.

DUers should not let the right-wing talking points about Mr. Dukakis warp their view of why he would be a great senator for the state of Massachusetts.

[HomerRamone]

10. no--too old--I live in MA and we need someone electable for the long haul nt

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

11. +1 ... find someone who will be electable for the next seven years

or thirteen or nineteen.

[blueclown]

50. You run for election in the Senate every six years.

[Mass]

13. Caretaker senator. Just like Kirk, the person will not be able to run in the election.

The point being that the governor should not be able to choose our senator for us.

[TwilightGardener]

14. Well...this is stupid. It's apparent that they have no good batters

on deck in MA. Doesn't give me hope that we will be able to hold the seat.

[Mass]

15. No, what is stupid is to ignore the context. This is a caretaker senator.

He probably will be chosen on the basis he will not run in the election.

[TwilightGardener]

17. Why would it be a bad thing to appoint someone who also has

the capability to run and win? I don't understand.

[Mass]

18. Patrick has said in 2010 he will not name a senator who will run.

He sees that as choosing for the people. I appreciate my governor thinks people should be able to elect who they want, and not support somebody he has named.

[TwilightGardener]

19. I'm going to be honest, that's a ridiculous position.

The people can choose not to elect his appointee. Republicans would grab an upcoming star and send him out there. This is why we lose seats.

[CreekDog]

24. ugh, you aren't reading

people keep trying to explain it to you, but you are just wanting the law to say what you want it to say.

[TwilightGardener]

25. It's not really an "ugh" moment. I disagree with the policy.

I think it's stupid. I don't see the point of putting in an 80-year-old instead of a viable future candidate. Whether it's the law or a governor's stance, I don't agree with it. We should be taking advantage of opportunities to promote viable and fresh new candidates.

[patrice]

22. Definition of "a" "likely"? How many other possibilities are there? I'd like someone younger. nt

Last edited Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:25 PM - Edit history (1)

[Myrina]

23. Just give me a Kennedy, please?

Jeeez, already.

[SwankyXomb]

29. If not a Kennedy, how about ...

She'd have to move to Mass, and probably quit at NBC, but Chelsea Clinton's old enough now.

[hrmjustin]

31. Welcome to DU and I hope you enjoy the site.

[Mass]

39. Thanks, but no thanks.

Probably the best way to lose the seat to Brown is to get somebody who has no ties to the state.

BTW, it may have escaped you, but there are already a few people who have said they are interested. Among them, Ed Markey, who would be a good choice.

(Note: I would not propose Vanessa Kerry, and at least she lives and works in Boston, so Chelsea Clinton is not even something I want to think about).

[Jackpine Radical]

45. ABC

Anyone
But
Caroline

[Euphoria]

26. Great idea! I lived in MA during his tenure

and Dukakis did a great job. Also supported his run for presidency against G.H.W. Bush.

[Berlum]

28. The Duke

Love it.

[JDPriestly]

30. Kerry should have the maturity and patriotic spirit to refuse the appointment.

This is the loss of a Senate seat at a time when we need Kerry in the Senate. This is a bad, bad mistake on President Obama's part.

[The Stranger]

37. Yes!

Someone here agrees with me.

[blm]

40. When did irrational fearfulness become a mark of maturity, JD? When was patriotism defined

as skipping over the best person for the job in order to calm those in your party who are increasingly fearful about political fallout?

[cstanleytech]

58. What if Joe Kennedy gets it though? No loss then is it? Plus you would think

it would make it harder for someone to beat him in an election for the seat.

[patrice]

34. I'd like to see an END to this "It's __________ 's turn" crap! nt

[Bucky]

49. So you don't like my alternative suggestion then that they appoint Walter Mondale?

[patrice]

56. .

[bec]

35. Just like Ted Kennedy's

seat, a temporary replacement will be named until the special election. I am hearing Ed Markey may run for the seat.

[Gormy Cuss]

41. Excellent choice.

He's obviously not going to be in it for the long haul but he's a seasoned elder statesman who knows and loves the Bay State. The only other person that I can think of who would do as good a job would be Barney Frank.

Kudos to Patrick.

[Nye Bevan]

43. At least he knows not to go for a ride in a tank (nt)

[Marrah_G]

51. He is too old for a campaign

[graham4anything]

53. TED KENNEDY passed the torch to PRESIDENT OBAMA, who will pass the torch to VICKY KENNEDY

America needs a Kennedy again and this is perfect

Vicky is already pro-major gun control

what could be better than Vicky leading Mass. and America

THE DREAM LIVES ON!!!

[former9thward]

55. Dukakis says no.

He says he won't take it. http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/12/17/michael-dukakis-will-not-be-interim-senator-if-kerry-resigns/

[Iggy]

57. Oh Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!

yet another OLD white guy in the senate. that's a great choice!!

[Kingofalldems]

60. Not news and not even true.