Kentucky Senate Seats Disputed Candidate [ didn't live in district required time]

AP via yahoo ^ | Jan 7, 2005 | MARK R. CHELLGREN

[Mike Fieschko]

The Republican candidate in a disputed election was sworn in Friday as the newest member of the Kentucky Senate, even though a judge ruled she did not meet the state's residency requirements. One GOP senator threatened to resign in protest.

AP Photo

Dana Seum Stephenson lived in Indiana from 1997 to 2000, but the Kentucky Constitution requires that senators live in the state for at least six years before taking office. Also, Stephenson is 23, and the constitution says senators be at least 30.

Brushing aside such concerns, the Republican-dominated Senate swore in Stephenson and defeated along party lines a committee's recommendation that Democrat Virginia Woodward be declared the winner of the Louisville district.

Senate President David Williams said he was confident the Senate had the power to determine its own membership.

"No court in the land could overturn that," he said.

On Election Day, Stephenson received 22,772 votes to Woodward's 21,750 votes, according to unofficial returns. At a judge's urging, the State Board of Elections certified Woodward the winner, and she took the oath of office on Jan. 1. But Stephenson asked the Senate to decide the race.

Democrats protested the decision to seat Stephenson. Senate floor leader Ed Worley called it "the greatest single act of pure, raw, ugly politics as I have ever seen take place in our Capitol."

Woodward had challenged Stephenson's residency on the eve of the November election, but the case was not heard in court until after the votes were cast.

Republican Sen. Bob Leeper, a member of the committee that recommended Woodward be declared the winner, proposed a special election to fill the seat. When Williams refused the request, Leeper said in a breaking voice that he had "tolerated a great deal up here" and threatened to resign. Leeper then left the Senate floor.

Stephenson's father is also a Republican member of the Senate.

[rellimpank]

---totally agree---another situation is the guy in Washington state who voted his dead wife---

Responsible people should demand adherence to the law--

[Muzzle_em]

The second sentence of the second paragraph in the article above says she is only 23.

[Lion Den Dan]

To all who think it is horrible for the Republicans to seat the winning candidate, please keep in mind that the state Senate seems to have that authority under our constitution. As for eligibility, a few years ago the Dems candidate filed after the cut off date if she filed at all and was allowed to take office. The court said that they could not disenfranchise a whole political party. Since the board of elections chose to accept Stevenson's filing papers, I guess we can't disenfranchise the Republican Party either. The Republicans are finally playing hardball.

[edwinland]

weird ... I searched on Google and this is the only article that says she's 23. even her opponent (who went to court over the residency issue) never mentioned her age. So I guess the article is just wrong but what an odd thing to invent.

On the residency side it looks like the article is right, although I wonder if perhaps she had been a resident of Kentucky in the past and the argument is over whether residency must be continuous for 6 years?

[Bluegrass Conservative]

This definitely gives the Kentucky GOP a black eye at a point when they're stilling growing into majority status.

I'm afraid that is exactly what the public perception is going to be. Honestly, I think the Senate was well within the law to seat Dana. I'm not sure it was the best decision though.

And, well we all know, in politics, perception is reality.

[edwinland]

Is the filing date in the Kentucky Constitution? If so, then both parties are equally wrong. But I doubt it. If not, then the Dems did something sneaky and the GOP did something that is just plain wrong.

[Bluegrass Conservative]

In the second paragraph it reads, "Also, Stephenson is 23, and the constitution says senators be at least 30." I've been keeping close tabs on this story and actually know Ms. Stephenson. She's in her thirties, not 23. I don't know what Chellgren was smoking when he wrote this one.

[Bluegrass Conservative]

The second sentence of the second paragraph in the article above says she is only 23.

Yeah, that's the part that is not true. I promise you Dana is in her thirties and this has NEVER been an issue. I know Dana and have been following this whole debacle closely.

[Bluegrass Conservative]

Okay, evidently Chellgren goofed up with original article or it was altered slightly. Click on the actual link at the top of the story to go to the AP site. You'll see that it says that Dana is 33 years old.

[Mike Fieschko]

AP Correction Alert:

By MARK R. CHELLGREN, Associated Press Writer

FRANKFORT, Ky. - The Republican candidate in a disputed election was sworn in Friday as the newest member of the Kentucky Senate, even though a judge ruled she did not meet the state's residency requirements. One GOP senator threatened to resign in protest.

Dana Seum Stephenson, 33, lived in Indiana from 1997 to 2000, but the Kentucky Constitution requires that senators live in the state for at least six years before taking office.

...

Senate President David Williams said he was confident the Senate had the power to determine its own membership. He said, for example, that the Senate could have a 23-year-old lawmaker, even though the constitution says senators must be at least 30.

Kentucky Senate Seats Disputed Candidate 27 minutes ago

[Oztrich Boy]

Senate President Caligua Williams said he was confident the Senate had the power to determine its own membership.

"Living Constitution! Living Constitution!"

[Mike Fieschko]

Okay, evidently Chellgren goofed up with original article or it was altered slightly. Click on the actual link at the top of the story to go to the AP site. You'll see that it says that Dana is 33 years old.

That's wild. I copied and pasted from the original article when I posted this. Now it's changed, as you point out.

[frog_jerk_2004]

Just a "slight" correction. I'm sure it has already become plank over at DU

[Bluegrass Conservative]

Trust me, Mark Chellgren is a complete moron (I've had some dealings with him). If you ever saw Dana, it would be clear that she is not 23 years old.

[Bluegrass Conservative]

Actually, according to the Kentucky Constitution, the State Senate does have the ability to determine its own membership, provided that the member in question was actually elected. They can not simply appoint members.

Dana Seum Stephenson was elected. Her eligibility was questioned. Since she was actually elected, the Senate was the one charged with determining her eligibility, not the courts. The courts would have been charged with determining it prior to the election.

[DameAutour]

Yeah, he "goofed".

A "mistake" would be if he had just put a 2 instead of a 3 by accident when giving her age.

But not only does the article say she is 23, it goes on to say that senators have to be at least 30. Who told this reporter that her age was even an issue? Did he look up the constitutional requirements himself?

Weird.

[Bluegrass Conservative]

On the residency side it looks like the article is right, although I wonder if perhaps she had been a resident of Kentucky in the past and the argument is over whether residency must be continuous for 6 years?

That subject was brought up, but it's pretty well understood that the 6 years have to be the 6 years immediately preceeding the election. The big question in this case surrounded dual-residency. If she had dual-residency, wouldn't that count for the 6 year requirement?

[You Dirty Rats]

Actually, according to the Kentucky Constitution, the State Senate does have the ability to determine its own membership, provided that the member in question was actually elected.

This sounds like a circular argument. Maybe I'm just slow late on a Friday afternoon, but if someone is actually elected, then what does the Senate need to decide? And who decides what "actually elected" is, anyway? The Senate? A Court? Phyllis George?

[Bluegrass Conservative]

Who told this reporter that her age was even an issue? Did he look up the constitutional requirements himself? Weird.

Not really as weird as it is moronic. But, hey, that's Mark Chellgren. It would be great if he would lose his job over this, but that will never happen. Especially when his brother is the CEO of Ashland Oil, one of the largest companies in Kentucky.

[edwinland]

Honestly, I think the Senate was well within the law to seat Dana.

How can you say that when the Constitutional provision is so clear? Saying "it's up to the Senate to decide what the Constitution means" and then letting them decide something which is the opposite of what the Constitution says is wrong. That's exactly what the liberal judges do with the US Constitution. Even if the US Constituion gave the Supreme Court the sole authority to interpret the Constitution, Roe v. Wade would still be wrong.