Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Back in 2004, when Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts and John Kerry looked like he had a chance of winning the presidency, the Democratic state legislature passed a bill to prevent Romney from appointing a replacement.  They didn’t want him naming a Republican to take over Kerry’s seat, after all.  So the new rules called for empty Senate seats to be filled by a special election instead.

But now it’s 2009, a Democrat is governor, and the legislature is thinking they should change the rules back and allow the governor to name a quick replacement for Ted Kennedy. Apparently they’re halfway there:

After hours of testy debate, the Massachusetts House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation allowing Gov. Deval Patrick to appoint an interim successor to Senator Edward M. Kennedy.

The House voted 95 to 58; the measure now goes to the State Senate, which could take up the proposal on Friday….Therese Murray, a Democrat and president of the State Senate, has remained publicly noncommittal on the proposal despite calls from the Obama administration and from Victoria Reggie Kennedy, Mr. Kennedy’s widow. The Senate, which like the House is overwhelmingly Democratic, is said to be split on the issue.

Well, look, I sympathize with Sen. Murray and the mixed feelings of her fellow Dems.  This is obviously Calvinball, after all.  But seriously, ask yourselves this: do you think the Texas legislature would hesitate even a few hours to do the same thing in reverse?  Or any other Republican state legislature?

I didn’t think so.  Now go change the law and let Deval Patrick fill that Senate seat.  Don’t be chumps.

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate