Congress is only a week old, and already three Republican House members and four Republican senators have announced their departure from Congress in the next election. No Democrats have made similar announcements. (The only thing that comes close is the run of Democrats who are leaving Congress to join the new administration, but that's a different matter.)
Rep. Jerry Moran (R-KS) is running for the Senate; Rep. Zach Wamp (R-TN) is running for governor, and Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) is retiring. Added to this are senators Bond (MO), Brownback (KS), Martinez (FL), and Voinovich (OH). Other than Voinovich and perhaps Bond, none of these are particularly superannuated.
One of the core tenants of the "strategic politicians" theory of elections is that the behavior of the most informed and "interested" political actors well ahead of an election is what most determines the general contours of the outcomes. By conventional analysis, 2010 should be a relatively good year for Republicans, since it will be the off-year election with a Democratic presidents. And, the year has just begun --- lots more can happen. However, the early returns suggest that 2010 is considered to be a tough year for Republicans, and those in the know are beginning to get out now.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
The Senate convenes, with two, count 'em two, potential challenges
The 111th Congress convenes today, and from what I can tell, this will be the first time in a long time that the Senate has been faced with two potential challenges --- to the appointment of Roland Burris to fill out Barack Obama's Illinois Senate seat and to the election of Al Franken to the Minnesota seat previously held by Norm Coleman. Each presents slightly different issues.
The Franken-Coleman controversy is an old fashioned dispute over a close election. Coleman is challenging the certification of the election by the Minnesota canvassing board, so he will not have a certificate of election when the Senate convenes today. (The Minneapolis Star-Tribute has been covering the recount exceptionally well. Here is today's article.) While there will be some words thrown around, no doubt, don't expect anything formal done today. (Roll Call [requires subscription] reports this morning that Sen. Reid will not push the issue of seating Franken today.)
The Burris controversy is tainted by the person who appointed him, Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Unlike Franken, Burris will be in DC today and will try to be seated. Like Franken, Burris still does not have a certificate of election from the Illinois Secretary of State, who is refusing to sign it, due to Blagojevich's indictment on corruption charges. So, the current center of action is actually in the Illinois Supreme Court, where Burris has filed a writ of mandamus to force the SOS to issue the certificate. The Burris controversy is much more complex than the Franken-Colman kerfuffle. Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog is by far the best place to learn about the issues and follow the unfolding analysis by a bunch of smart, and conflicted experts.
A couple of words about sources. First, the Senate's 1995 United States Senate Election, Expulsion and Censure Cases is a basic source on past cases. Second, the most current political science research on the issue is contained in Jeff Jenkins's 2005 article in Studies in American Political Development. Two take-aways: (1) Disputed election cases are now rare and (2) they tend to be resolved in non-partisan ways.
UPDATE: Since I've written this, other bloggers have produced nice summaries of the legal issues surrounding the Burris case. This posting from Michael Stern is particularly extensive and useful.
The Franken-Coleman controversy is an old fashioned dispute over a close election. Coleman is challenging the certification of the election by the Minnesota canvassing board, so he will not have a certificate of election when the Senate convenes today. (The Minneapolis Star-Tribute has been covering the recount exceptionally well. Here is today's article.) While there will be some words thrown around, no doubt, don't expect anything formal done today. (Roll Call [requires subscription] reports this morning that Sen. Reid will not push the issue of seating Franken today.)
The Burris controversy is tainted by the person who appointed him, Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Unlike Franken, Burris will be in DC today and will try to be seated. Like Franken, Burris still does not have a certificate of election from the Illinois Secretary of State, who is refusing to sign it, due to Blagojevich's indictment on corruption charges. So, the current center of action is actually in the Illinois Supreme Court, where Burris has filed a writ of mandamus to force the SOS to issue the certificate. The Burris controversy is much more complex than the Franken-Colman kerfuffle. Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog is by far the best place to learn about the issues and follow the unfolding analysis by a bunch of smart, and conflicted experts.
A couple of words about sources. First, the Senate's 1995 United States Senate Election, Expulsion and Censure Cases is a basic source on past cases. Second, the most current political science research on the issue is contained in Jeff Jenkins's 2005 article in Studies in American Political Development. Two take-aways: (1) Disputed election cases are now rare and (2) they tend to be resolved in non-partisan ways.
UPDATE: Since I've written this, other bloggers have produced nice summaries of the legal issues surrounding the Burris case. This posting from Michael Stern is particularly extensive and useful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
