Should Illinois hold a special election to fill the vacant Senate seat of President-elect Barack Obama?

No

1 of 2

by Tom Forgue

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

Although a special election might be a good idea in theory, current circumstances may make it a less optimal device.

First, I think all can agree that few, if any, believe the current Governor should have unfettered discretion to appoint anyone to the vacant Senate post. Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (D. Nev.) has already stated that the Senate would refuse to seat such an appointee. Even in the unlikely event that Senator Reid is wrong in that statement, any person appointed by Governor Blagojevich would undoubtedly operate under a cloud that would limit that person's effectiveness to act on behalf of Illinois.

Clearly, an alternate approach to filling Illinois's vacant Senate seat is needed. A special election, however, may not be the way to go. Leaving aside the cost issue at a time when the State is having financial difficulties, a special election could have skewed results. Because of the limited time to raise funds and to campaign, only a very limited universe of already well-established and well-financed persons could hope to participate. As former Senator Obama demonstrated, someone who initially does not have those attributes might make the best Senator. At least as importantly, although a special election happens quickly compared to a general election, it still takes far more time than an appointment. Even under optimal circumstances, a special election is unlikely before the spring. President Obama's first months in office promise to be dynamic. As a big state, the people of Illinois are already under-represented in the United States Senate. It does our state little good to further diminsh our representation during a period that looks to be so busy and important.

Happily, there is a middle ground solutions between allowing Governor Blagojevich unfettered discretion to appoint someone and an expensive and time-consuming special election. The solution is in the Illinois Constitution itself and is well-known to all Americans. That is, instead of the Governor simply appointing a new Senator as under current law, the appointment would be subject to the advice and consent of the Illinois Senate (or, if more politically palatable because of the unusual circumstances, both houses of the General Assembly).

Simply amending 10 ILCS 5/25-8 (the statute giving the Governor the power to appoint a person to a vacant U.S. Senate seat) to require legislative confirmation of a senatorial nomination offers several advantages.

First, this is a familiar procedure and common in American government. It is already the practice for most gubernatorial appointments under Article V, Section 9 of the Illinois Constitution. Although more usual for non-elected positions (such as department heads or judges), appointment with legislative confirmation has a precedent in U.S. political history for offices traditionally the subject of popular election. For example, Gerald Ford eventually ascended to the presidency (normally an elected post) by his nomination by President Nixon to be Vice President and by his confirmation by Congress under the 25th Amendment. (Many Americans still remember that among President Ford's first, stirring words after assuming his new office were: "I am acutely aware that you have not elected me as your President by your ballots, and so I ask you to confirm me as your President with your prayers. And I hope that such prayers will also be the first of many.")

Second, nomination and confirmation will likely give Illinois its full U.S. Senate representation in a much quicker manner (and almost certainly at less expense) than a special election at a time when interests in dispatch and economy are perhaps at their zenith. (And, as our friends in Minnesota are currently experiencing, an election may not be over for some time after election day, which could further lengthen the time Illinois is without its full complement of senate representation.)

Thir d, nomination and legislative confirmation provides important checks and validation to our new Senator. The legislators are elected by the people. They are our representatives. They speak and act in our name. Thus, confirmation by elected representatives would give our new Senator a democratic imprimatur by use of this long-established method of the American system. As important, confirmation by the legislature would remove any taint that might attach to the new Senator. Through its already established investigation and vetting system for nominees, the legislature could make sure (and reassure the public and his/her new colleagues in Washington) that the nominee (and the nomination) is legitimate. If the legislature was unsatisfied with the inquiry into the nomination (or the nominee), it could hold the nomination or vote it down (or threaten to do either) to insure the integrity of our new Senator.

The Illinois Constitution offers another avenue that would further remove any questions about a new Senator and that would allow Illinois to have both Senators in place for the new presidential Administration. Under Article V, Section 6(c), the Governor may temporarily remove him or herself from office and then reclaim the position (both by filing notifications with the Secretary of State). Thus, in the interest of giving Illinois a new Senator quickly, the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and legislative leaders could agree that the Governor would temporarily relinquish his position, allow the Lieutenant Governor to make a nomination, and then the Governor could resume his post. Essentially, it would be a "stand-still" for a very short period while the Lieutenant Governor names a new Senator. This would allow a new Senator to be quickly chosen in the interest of the welfare of Illinois, remove the current controversy surrounding the Governor as a point of contention over the selection of our new Senator, and allow the parties to then resume whatever other avenues they may wish to pursue.

Taken together, our current system already has the pieces in place to give us a new Senator who can be chosen quickly, with minimal expense, and with proper checks and balances on both the person and the process by which he or she is chosen. These are not radical solutions, but ones already enshrined and well-established in our system of government. It offers us the opportunity to have full representation in the Senate at a time when it will be needed.

Learn more about this author, Tom Forgue.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.