Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boston Globe Writer Ignores Mass. Law on When Appointed Senator's Term Ends
NewsBusters ^ | January 18, 2010 | P.J. Gladnick

Posted on 01/18/2010 2:05:57 PM PST by PJ-Comix

Boston Globe writer Lisa Wangsness can't be blamed too much for assuming that appointed senator Paul Kirk's term ends when the winner of tomorrow's election in Massachusetts, Scott Brown (photo) or Martha Coakley, is seated. Wrong. Mass. law is very specific on that term limit as Fred Barnes has noted in the Weekly Standard. The reason why Wangsness can be forgiven for her error is that it is the same assumption made by most of the rest of the mainstream media. Here is the relevant section of her article about the effect of tomorrow's election on the health care bill:

Another possibility would be for Democrats to hurry and pass a compromise bill before Brown were seated.


(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: 111th; bostonglobe; ignorantmedia; ma2010; marshall4nyt; marshallnotlaw; marthacoakley; paulkirk; scottbrown; sjc4bostonglobe; sjc4nyt
It isn't a matter of when the next senator's term begins. What counts is that Paul Kirk's term ENDS tomorrow. The senate parliamentarian needs to order his removal if he attempts to hang around after tomorrow's election.
1 posted on 01/18/2010 2:05:59 PM PST by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: holdonnow

I hope you read this and, if need be, get word to the Senate GOP.

It seems they can delay seating the new Senator if they chose, but Kirk’s power expires upon “election and qualification.”

I hope you bring your expertise and influence to bear on this one. Big.

Huge.


2 posted on 01/18/2010 2:09:35 PM PST by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Somehow, I think the Dems overlooked this...having gotten all wound up in thoughts of challenging etc...

Can someone tell me why they didn't run Kirk....whoever he is...

3 posted on 01/18/2010 2:11:12 PM PST by Sacajaweau (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
WOW! Just wow!

This is fantastic and don't know why we are only now learning this?

Now it remains to find one (JUST ONE) Republitard in the Senate who has a "pair" (a daunting task) to move that this law be enforced, or the entire R contingent will refuse to allow any further Senate business until they do

Next there needs to be a move for an immediate injunction (by someone, I don't know who) in some Fed Court if Kirk does not step down.

4 posted on 01/18/2010 2:14:49 PM PST by Conservative Vermont Vet ((One of ONLY 37 Conservatives in the People's Republic of Vermont. Socialists and Progressives All))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

Yes. After tomorrow the Senator from Massachusetts will be either Brown, Coakley or Kennedy. So, no matter how close the election, Kirk ceases to be the Senator after the polls close because someone else will be the elected Senator. All three candidates are qualified.

Even if Coakley were to win (which I see as almost impossible at this point), Kirk cannot vote on any more bills. So any delay will not help the Dems. They need 60 votes. It is not that the Repubs need 41 to block. If a Senator is absent, dead or whatever he does not count toward 60.


5 posted on 01/18/2010 2:22:35 PM PST by Truth is a Weapon (Truth, it hurts soooo good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth is a Weapon

Both Rasmussen & Zogby just picked Coakley by 1-2 points on Hannity’s show - perhaps they know the dead will be voting in VERY high numbers for Marcia.


6 posted on 01/18/2010 2:25:54 PM PST by newfreep (Palin/DeMint 2012 - Bolton: Secy of State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

I’m sure the Mass legislature will change the law on Wednesday.

It’s not like they haven’t pulled that trick before.


7 posted on 01/18/2010 2:26:17 PM PST by seowulf (Petraeus, cross the Rubicon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Kirk said from the “get go” that he wouldn’t run as permanent replacement.


8 posted on 01/18/2010 2:34:36 PM PST by donhunt (America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
MR. Kirk. The Senate floor is reserved only for senators. Please don't cause a scene by forcing me to call upon the Sergeant-at-Arms to physically remove you. Thank you and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
9 posted on 01/18/2010 2:38:45 PM PST by PJ-Comix (I love ROCK 'N ROLL! I memorized the all WORDS to "WIPE-OUT'' in 1965!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
Both Rasmussen & Zogby just picked Coakley by 1-2 points on Hannity’s show

Really? What was their rationale and how did they explain their position given what we are seeing in the polls (didn't Rasmussen show Brown +7 today?)?

10 posted on 01/18/2010 2:43:30 PM PST by wolf24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

Why are you the only person reporting this?


11 posted on 01/18/2010 3:21:22 PM PST by MrDem (And this is a loyal lifelong Democrat saying this... Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newfreep
Where does that leave us? On Intrade, Brown begins Monday morning as the slight favorite in the race. However, nobody really knows who will win because it all comes down to turnout. Clearly, Brown has the more enthusiastic support and has run a better campaign. If turnout remains low, he is likely to win. That’s why the president went to Boston. If his appearance boosts turnout among Democrats, the Democrat will win. That’s a long way around saying that we’re right back where we were a week ago - at the time of the last Rasmussen Reports poll. Brown is leading slightly among those certain to vote, and Coakley will do better if more Democrats show up.

Straight from Rass's web site.

12 posted on 01/18/2010 3:25:21 PM PST by MrDem (And this is a loyal lifelong Democrat saying this... Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MrDem
IIRC, the polls also showed New Jersey Governor much closer than it was. Of course, that didn't have the national implications and Obama didn't try to convert the race into a referendum on his administration. That's the wild card here, will his intervention hurt or help Brown?
13 posted on 01/18/2010 3:31:51 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wolf24; All
Both Rasmussen & Zogby just picked Coakley by 1-2 points on Hannity’s show

Rasmussen Reports today: "That’s a long way around saying that we’re right back where we were a week ago - at the time of the last Rasmussen Reports poll. Brown is leading slightly among those certain to vote, and Coakley will do better if more Democrats show up."

Strange. Rasmussen did not do his own poll since last week, and yet he is commenting on poll someone's else's numbers. Rasmussen also said that Brown has a "slight" lead in Intrade. Slight???? 79 to 25?

Maybe he is afraid to do another poll for some reason? If he thinks this race is not important enough to poll, he's out of his mind.

14 posted on 01/18/2010 3:31:58 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Pat Caddell: Democrats are drinking kool-aid in a political Jonestown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

My guess is that Rasmussen didn’t want to do a final poll over the weekend + a holiday.


15 posted on 01/18/2010 4:33:27 PM PST by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

Rass has been getting attacked without end lately by the media and assorted leftists and blogs. I wonder if he decided to just lay low this week to try and lessen the hate and attacks coming his way.


16 posted on 01/18/2010 5:36:17 PM PST by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
I can't say Rasmussen is wrong, because he didn't really say anything. I think Brown wins by +5.


17 posted on 01/18/2010 5:44:21 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Pat Caddell: Democrats are drinking kool-aid in a political Jonestown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson