Maddow doing a special comment! Why are senators being picked this way?

[babylonsister]

It's just dumb. Burris and Gillebrand (?) (she's new). These positions are too important to leave it to one person to select someone. I tend to agree. We also need an expedited system to do so.

[whistle]

1. I agree with Rachel

[rpannier]

2. One of the arguments in favor of keeping it as it is now

The cost is pretty high to run a special election.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Not just running the election, but...

the costs of deciding who is going to run in the election.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. I also agree with her assessment of the situation..

She made an excellent case.

[babylonsister]

7. She did. So a new system is needed that doesn't cost so much. nt

[dsc]

4. it dates to how Senators used to be picked

Until the 1920's Senators were appointed by the legislatures of the states they served. Thus they weren't elected. If one died or resigned and the legislature was out of session, then the governor appointed a temporary senator and the legislature either accepted that one or named its own when it did get in session. It made sense. Now it probably is an anacronism but a special election is time consuming and expensive so it cuts both ways.

[stillcool]

6. We're going to have to have one..

if one of our Senator's leave. The law says that the election will be held 145 to 160 days after the seat is vacated. I don't know what the cost is, but how often does it happen?

[babylonsister]

8. We have both now, but at what cost? Or not. Who knows? nt

[Blue_In_AK]

9. Alaska passed a resolution calling for special elections

for vacant Senate and House seats. It makes so much more sense. We could have had a disaster this year with Ted leaving if Mark Begich hadn't won.