Roland Burris, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s pick to replace President-elect Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate, should follow the example of former U.S. Sen. Dean Barkley of Minnesota by agreeing to serve only an abbreviated tenure. That’s the suggestion of The Nation magazine’s State of Change blog, which cites nascent impeachment efforts against the governor in terming the taint of Blago’s touch “untenable” enough to preclude Burris from filling out Obama’s full term.
The Barkley precedent stirs up unresolved questions about Minnesota’s ongoing Senate recount: Which major-party candidate will end up benefiting from Barkley’s third-party Senate run this year? And would Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty follow Blago’s example and fill a vacancy in Minnesota’s Senate contingent? And will the Senate be as willing to seat Burris or a Pawlenty pick as it was with Barkley eight years ago?
Former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura appointed Barkley, a fellow Independence Party stalwart, to fill out the remaining weeks of U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone’s term after his death just days before the 2002 election. Barkley was a third-party candidate for the office this year, drawing enough support (15 percent) to affect the result. But it’s still unclear whether Coleman or his Democratic rival Al Franken will be the ultimate electoral beneficiary of Barkley’s participation.
Meanwhile, Pawlenty has downplayed the likelihood that he’d exercise his option to fill a vacancy in the Wellstone/Barkley/Coleman seat. While the embattled Blagojevich may have little to lose, Pawlenty is busy parlaying his national stature as an also-ran for the GOP vice-presidential nomination into short-list status for the party’s presidential pick in 2012. That likely makes the political cost of any appointment to fill a Minnesota Senate vacancy untenable for T-Paw.
There’s also the question of the willingness of the U.S. Senate to seat either Burris or a Pawlenty appointee to the Minnesota Senate seat. The senators themselves hold the constitutional wild card in the process voters started Nov. 4 when they tried to choose a senator, and Majority Leader Harry Reid has already signaled opposition to seating Burris.













2 Comments »
Comment posted December 31, 2008 @ 4:23 pm
Chris: What does the “precedent” have to do with the current election? Every election, regardless of the number of candiates, requires the winner to EARN enough votes to win. Period. You are very mis-guided suggesting that part of the FrankenCole benefited by Barkley’s candidacy.
Give Dean some credit for EARNing about half a million votes and was only in the race four months and raised about $150k ALL through individual donations.
Those other two? Two years, $42 million was given, and none could not get more that 42%. They both should be hanging their heads in shame. Maybe one could have sealed the deal with $50 million and more negative ads?
And, news flash: The IP is a major party.
Comment posted December 31, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
Deep P, thanks for the comments and correction. I’ll fix the “major party” mistake. I didn’t really mean to knock Dean by suggesting that whoever ends up in the Senate will be seen as having benefitted from Barkley’s candidacy. He didn’t win but he raised issues and affected the outcome … we just don’t know what the outcome is yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment