Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

New way to select senator isn't needed

Rocky Mountain News

Published January 27, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

Gov. Bill Ritter selected a political novice, former Denver schools Superintendent Michael Bennet, to succeed Ken Salazar in the U.S. Senate. Had Ritter chosen a more seasoned pol, we're guessing the 2009 legislature would not be poised to consider a bill taking the appointment power away from future governors, and instead requiring a special election to fill Senate vacancies.

Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Littleton, is expected to file legislation any day now that would make the process for filling a vacant U.S. Senate seat nearly identical to the one used to replace departed U.S. House members.

Kopp's bill would require the governor to call a special election no more than 49 days after a vacancy was announced, unless the vacancy occurred within 90 days of a general election, in which case the seat would remain open until the regular election.

Supporters offer several reasonable arguments for change. On balance, however, we're not convinced a thorough overhaul of the appointment system is justified.

For starters, we're leery of the price tag for a statewide special election. The secretary of state's office estimated the state's costs of holding a special election could reach $2 million; counties would have significant spending obligations of their own. And yet even without a special election, Coloradans would vote on candidates for that same office within a relatively short period - no more than 21 months.

Nor are we sure that the process for replacing House members is a sound way to vet candidates for a statewide Senate election.

As with House vacancies, parties would nominate candidates for a vacant Senate seat by convention or by appointment from their central committees. Candidates who didn't win a party nomination could petition their way to the ballot. Yet House hopefuls are more likely to be familiar to more of their constituents given the size of their districts. Senate candidates, meanwhile, simply would not have the time to build relationships across Colorado before a special election if they didn't have them in place already.

Backers of the bill rightly note that the governor's power to fill vacancies is absolute. He could pick a crony or a relative - as did former Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski, who appointed his daughter Lisa to occupy his U.S. Senate seat when he won the governor's race in 2002.

Nor is a governor under any obligation to solicit public input before making a selection. Ritter did, in this instance - an e-mail account he set up asking for recommendations received some 3,300 messages. And yet that feedback apparently had little influence on his choice. An open records request by The Associated Press found that none of the e-mails released suggested Bennet as a candidate.

We'd be more sympathetic to the proposal if these vacancies were regular occurrences. But they're not. Prior to Salazar's resignation, there had been only three appointed senators from Colorado since the 17th Amendment allowed the direct election of senators in 1913. None of those occurred after World War II.

Incidentally, two of the appointed senators failed to win a full term.

Every governor has a huge incentive to make a wise selection. A lousy choice reflects badly on the governor - and in Ritter's case, if Bennet does a poor job, voters can take it out on both of them in November 2010.

Comments

  • January 27, 2009

    6:03 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    DakotaPlainsman writes:

    I don't know Senator Kopp, but he's in left field on this. Maybe just sour grapes that a professional politicion didn't get picked. Or maybe just partican whining. We elect a Gov to make major decisions. Gov Ritter did so. We'll see if he is right. In two years, the electorate will get a shot at picking a Senator. It works most of the time, Chicago politics is the exception there. Senator Kopp... work on real problems, don't invent problems that don't exist. I am a registered Republican and don't agree with this proposal.

  • January 27, 2009

    6:33 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    The RMN says "we're not convinced"? Who cares? It's not up to you. It's the right of the people to elect their representatives be it the House or the Senate.

    The Senate appointment rule is a throwback to the original constitution where States appointed Senators because they represented the State. That was changed by amendment and to get States to go along with the amendment States where "allowed" to set their own vacancy rules. Time for a change. Let the people vote.

  • January 27, 2009

    8:05 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Art writes:

    Bennett may turn out to be a good choice but the fact is that he is a complete unknown in most parts of the state, most people in the state have the feeling that he represents just Denver and not the whole state. This is the problem with having the gov appoint someone, no matter who he appoints it will appear that it is some form of partisanship. In this day and age we do have the ability to communicate quickly, even though the editorial staff of the RMN may not be aware of this fact, and in a matter of a few short weeks any candidate can be known to all in the state who care to learn about his or her qualifications. The idea that "candidates, meanwhile, simply would not have the time to build relationships across Colorado " is not valid. We want to decide for ourselves who our representatives and senators will be.

  • January 27, 2009

    9:03 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ghoax writes:

    Give me a break! When officials are appointed instead of elected, the party in power appoints those who are more suited to help push their agenda, despite what they claim. Mr. Bennett has unquestionable ties to the environmental movement that has worked hard to restrict or even prohibit energy growth and production. He also has personal ties that prohibit him from challenging the hoax of global warming. The people without a voice in their representation are not represented.

  • January 27, 2009

    10:25 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    44roger writes:

    let the people vote, numerous reasons stated here. they represent us, not the political machine in office.

  • January 27, 2009

    11:05 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jbowen43 writes:

    The method we have now works just fine and is much less cost to the poor overburdened whining Colorado taxpayer.

  • January 27, 2009

    1 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ptorres writes:

    The Governor system is no different than the Rock Mountain news system. Remember John Hickenlooper was a dark horse candidate and the news sold Denver voters that he would be an excellent Mayor. You sheep voted for him so be careful for what you ask for because you just might get it and not like it.