It was nice while it lasted:
http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/12/control_of_senate_at_issue_as.html

Democratic senator has a stroke, might have to resign. Govenor of the state is republican... bleh!

It's not a bad thing; stalemates make for more interesting politics.

It's not a bad thing; stalemates make for more interesting politics.

Is that the corallary to "politics make strange bed fellows"?

or wait, that doesn't say stale mates.

I think stale mates seek out marriage counselors. Or sex toy shops.

It's not a bad thing; stalemates make for more interesting politics.

Its wouldn't be a stalemate; Cheney could break any ties.

Of course, the Governor can only appoint a replacement if he actually dies, if hes incapicated, he can still be a senator, and the senate would still be 50/49 (And as that wouldnt be a tie, cheney could not vote)

It would be interesting to see who he'd appoint though, while conventional wisdom says he would appoint a republican, he might have respect for the people who voted him in; regardless though half of the country would be out for his blood.

the Governor can only appoint a replacement if he actually dies, if hes incapicated, he can still be a senator,


WTF? Is this for real? If so, they should change that law. 100 of the most influential people in the country next to the President and Vice President, and you can be mentally unfit for duty and still be a Senator? Sorry, they should have a "mentally unfit for command" clause in there somewhere.

The military has such a clause for its officers past a certain pay grade, and they aren't as quite as high up in the chain of decision making as the Senators. I'm pretty sure that the Supreme Court judges have to be "mentally fit for duty" as well.

I thought I read somewhere that there is such a clause for the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, and so on down the chain of command. At least it's brought up in all the political thrillers novels. (used to read Clive Cussler, Tom Clancy, etc, etc) And I think it was brought up in 24(the TV series). That should extend to all the Senators, I think.

The House, meh, there's oodles of them, you can have several of them out and no one notices.

Its wouldn't be a stalemate; Cheney could break any ties.I meant between the House and the Senate, and between the both of them and the President.

It's funny how one governor from some obscure state may hold the fate of the entire legislative branch of the country.

It's funny how one governor from some obscure state may hold the fate of the entire legislative branch of the country.

Kinda like a few thousand Florida voter's impact on world history.

The House, meh, there's oodles of them, you can have several of them out and no one notices.

We have had an instance with ALL of them out and the country seemed to work just fine..... There is a message in there somewhere.

from economist article about it


Is this likely? It may, in fact, be premature to say so. Predictions (or hopes) that the Democratic majority is imperilled would not come true as long as Mr Johnson remains alive. According to Chris Nelson, the secretary of state of South Dakota, as long as Mr Johnson lives (even if he is unable to serve) his seat would not be considered vacant. In that case, Governor Rounds would not have the opportunity to bring in a Republican senator, so the Democrats would keep a bare 50-49 majority.

Honestly I dont remember the technical parts for senators and incapitation, the 25th amendment is soley about presidens..

the 17th has this to state

Amendment 17, Clause 2. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

Nothing is actually said about being able to serve, just that its vacant, although I could see the court needing to clarify what it means, but from my interpretation, someonen not being able to serve, would still be technically in the seat.

interesting legal/constitutional question, i'm definately no expert so I may have missed stuff

Kinda like a few thousand Florida voter's impact on world history.
Actually, it came down to 1 person on the Supreme Court in 2000. :p

WTF? Is this for real? If so, they should change that law. 100 of the most influential people in the country next to the President and Vice President, and you can be mentally unfit for duty and still be a Senator? Sorry, they should have a "mentally unfit for command" clause in there somewhere.

Then there needs to be laws passed mandating that the political affiliation of the incapacitated provide the pool of replacement. Barring death, that seat will continue to be held by a Dem, until the 2008 elections, rather than permit the GOP governor to appoint a Republican to retake control.

I'm pretty sure that the Supreme Court judges have to be "mentally fit for duty" as well.

No, they don't. There are only three methods for replacing a Supreme Court Justice. Retirement, Death, and conviction in a Congressional impeachment, so far as I know.

They have been known to render opinions with a short court for relatively long periods due to the illness of a Justice.

I thought I read somewhere that there is such a clause for the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, and so on down the chain of command. At least it's brought up in all the political thrillers novels. (used to read Clive Cussler, Tom Clancy, etc, etc) And I think it was brought up in 24(the TV series). That should extend to all the Senators, I think.

Its the 25th Amendment, iirc, and its...sort of. It permits the President to temporarily remove himself from command, invoking the presidential succession, in the event of incapacity. It also permits his removal for incapacitation with a letter signed by the majority of his Cabinet, upon the approval and agreement of the Vice President (or whoever is next in the line of Presidential succession).

The 25th is never, however, automatically presumed to be in effect simply with the incapacity of the President. Only death can automatically trigger the succession.

Its the 25th Amendment, iirc, and its...sort of. It permits the President to temporarily remove himself from command, invoking the presidential succession, in the event of incapacity. It also permits his removal for incapacitation with a letter signed by the majority of his Cabinet, upon the approval and agreement of the Vice President (or whoever is next in the line of Presidential succession)..

Looked on Wikipedia and found that other than the Speaker of the House, senators are rarely in line for president. Ah well, I guess they can all take junkets all the time, and we won't miss em.

Here's the Wiki link. They've changed it like 4 times, over the years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

If the incumbent dies in office there is no reason nowadays that there can't be another election within three months, surely?

I think that is what happens actually, Anka. The next state wide election they elect someone new, but in the mean time the Gov. selects a replacement.