Back in 2004, when John Kerry was running for president, his fellow Senator, Ted Kennedy, was concerned that under Massachusetts law Republican Governor Mitt Romney would be the one to fill the vacancy should Kerry win. Kennedy successfully lobbied the state legislature to change the law and take the power of the appointment out of the Republican governor's hands. Instead, the bill required a special election to fill the seat, while making no provision of a temporary appointee in the interim.
Flash forward to today as Kennedy confronts not only his own mortality, but what it would mean for his Senate seat. Senator Kennedy has had a sudden change of heart about the law he worked so hard to pass. Now he wants the law changed back again, to give the power of the make the appointment back to the governor -- who now just happens to be a Democrat.
Why the sudden flip-flop? With the President's health "reform" bill needing every one of the sixty Democratic votes in the Senate, the loss of that one seat would be disastrous for the bill's future. So, suddenly the arguments used back in 2004 no longer apply. Kennedy is no longer worried about the voters being represented by an un-elected appointee of the governor's choosing. At least not when the governor is of his political party.
It is ironic that Kennedy himself was a one-time beneficiary of the old law. When his brother vacated his Senate seat after the 1960 presidential election, then then governor, a Democrat, appointed a former college roommate of the president's to fill the seat until Teddy was old enough to run in 1962.
Is it bad taste to call a man with a terminal illness a hypocrite? I don't think so. Because there are larger issues here about how power corrupts and how convenient it is for the powerful to try and manipulate the system to their own advantage. Kennedy will be leaving a complex enough legacy, he doesn't need to add hypocrisy to the mix.
No comments:
Post a Comment