So, Hevasi

[soleft]

I was wondering - at the point he leaves office whether he resigns, or is removed - is the replacement appointed by the Governor?

If yes, then I applaud him for not resigning. I even wonder if there was a back room agreement that the rest of the state party would disavow him publically, but that he'd stay on until Spitzer would be the one to make the appointment.

[Lucky Luciano]

1. I wondered teh same thing.

I voted straight dem, but held my nose for Hevesi. No crooks - though his misdeed was akin to stealing a dirty piece of candy on the floor of a supermarket compared to what the thugs have done. Nevertheless, he must go and hopefully Spitzer can appoint.

[sillyphoenix]

2. I think Spitzer would appoint his replacement

but to stay in office, the replacement would have to survive an election in '08

[Princess Turandot]

3. The other issue is whether Pataki could remove him before Eliot is sworn in..

There appears to be some uncertainty about what the process would be. (If Pataki could do so, I guess the rules applying to when the appointee would next run would be the same.)

I hope that if he makes it to January, that Spitzer et al would pressure him to resign at that point, perhaps to take care of his sick spouse. It may be the CPA in me coming out, but given his fiscal oversight role, abusing the public trust should be a political death sentence. It's a good thing that his opponent looked more suited to keeping a bar stool warm!

[RoccoR5955]

5. Pataki wants an investigation

Any investigation is going to take more than a couple of months, so Spitzer would appoint a successor.
Personally, the guy checked it out. His sources said it was okay, and he forgot to pay up. As long as he pays back what he owes, it's okay by me. After all, Pataki went to Hungary on the States dime!

[AntiWarPoster]

4. Rules

If he resigns, they have to approve his replacement. The state Senate can remove him from office with a 2/3rds vote, and they are controlled by Republicans. If he is forcibly removed, then Spitzer is allowed to appoint his replacement. I think that Spitzer should ask the Senate to remove him for corruption, and then Spitzer can appoint a better Democrat in his place.