Highlights:
"No one had a deeper and more abiding devotion to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts than Ted Kennedy. And even in his final days, as his frail health was abandoning him, Ted was still looking out for the interests of Massachusetts. He did so by asking that the laws be changed so that Massachusetts would not be without its two votes in the Senate in the event his seat became vacant."
<snip>
I know many in the legislature have expressed their concern that the electoral playing field might be unfairly tilted in the event that an interim appointee broke their commitment to not run for the office. That is why I want to express my personal commitment today, and I believe it is shared by Governor Patrick and by our entire congressional delegation, that if an appointee attempted to break that trust, we’d do all in our power to campaign against them and guarantee that they no longer have the privilege of representing our state. Make no mistake, in the real world of practical politics -- We won’t let anyone break their word to the people of Massachusetts.
<snip>
And we know that it is not just the act of voting but the thousands of acts of constituent service that hang in the balance. By law, Senator Kennedy’s offices are only allowed to remain open for the purpose of closing. When a vacancy occurs, the staff has 60 days to close the office – so now only 45 days left on that job. And for these next five months, unless there is an appointment and these experienced staff are working directly for a Senator, they are no longer allowed to do the important work of helping the people of Massachusetts with specific problems, like, late Social Security checks or school loans or Medicare coverage – and even to transfer casework requires a waiver of confidentiality. It is a complicated process.
<snip>
Let’s be candid: in 2002, I was reelected with 72 % of the vote. Had I won the presidency in 2004, under a flaw in the old law, Governor Romney would have appointed a Republican to serve until January, 2007. Correctly, legislators realized that would not have reflected the will of the people because that was not what nearly 1.7 million Massachusetts voters had chosen in 2002. A speedy special election was the right solution to a flawed law -- but in hindsight – as always, miraculously 20/20 -- we created a new flaw in the new law as well.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/09/kerry_wants_ken.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
