Massachusetts Dems Seek To Subvert Electoral Process
Posted: Tuesday, January 12, 2010
by Richard Vail
Chisel & Plane
Massachusetts Democrats once again are attempting to short circuit the electoral process there. In 2004, when it seemed likely that John Kerry (D, MA) would win the election for the presidency, the Democratic dominated legislature feared that the then Republican governor, Mitt Romney, would appoint a Republican to the seat. This was the original law in Massachusetts.
So, the legislature decided that a change in the law was necessary. So, they changed the law to one where in an emergency election would be held within 120 days of the vacancy occurring. Last year, when Ted Kennedy died, Democrats again altered their state's law from that direct election within 120 days of the vacancy occurring back to one in which the Governor appoints a temporary Senator. Only then, would there be an election in due course to fill the vacancy.
The Democrats that control the legislature as well as the administrative portion of state government, because they realized that the "interim" Senator would be the 60th vote that would break the deadlock on their plan to seize control of the nation's health care system. Now, there is a very real possibility that this seat will go to a Republican, the Democrats who control the state's administrative machinery are planning to postpone the swearing in of Scott Brown (R) until after the final passage of the bill, on the grounds that he has openly stated that he would vote against the measure.
Additionally, his strong showing against Martha Coakley (D), who is the Attorney General of Massachusetts, and has been running on a referendum on Mr. Obama's presidency and against the agenda that has been presented by the Democrats in Congress as well. Oddly enough, the people of Massachusetts, who have the first state mandated/run health care industry are strongly against passage of the bills presently before Congress. In one recent poll, 47% oppose the health care bill to only 41% who express support for it, this is nearly unheard of in a blue/blue state like Massachusetts.
Moreover, when the political double dealing in this matter is made worse when you consider that when Paul Tsongas died in office, his wife, Nikki Tsongas, won the subsequent special election and was sworn in and seated within 48 hours. The election was held on a Tuesday, certified on Wednesday, and she was sworn in on Thursday.
Massachusetts is the almost literally the birthplace of our democracy. After all, the then colonies began to unite when the Intollerable Acts were imposed upon Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1770's. These acts by the British parliament made many American come to the conclusion that our path lay in a different direction than that of the United Kingdom. To see their political decendants actually attempting to subvert the electoral process yet again is disappointing indeed.
UPDATE: When I posted this last week, I got hammered pretty hard for saying that the party controlling Congress would stoop so low as to abrogate the will of the voters. Yet, by yesterday morning, (Sunday, 17 Jan, 2010) pretty much every single blog/news agregate site as well as all of the news networks have posted stories stating exactly what I've written about here. One commenter in particlar accused me of being "an armchair conspiracy theorist." Yet, here we have national commentators saying exactly what I posited last week...draw your own conclusions.
UPDATE: Martha Coakley has conceded the election with 75% of the precincts reporting...Brown 53%, Coakley 46%...we have witnessed history!
The Democrats that control the legislature as well as the administrative portion of state government, because they realized that the "interim" Senator would be the 60th vote that would break the deadlock on their plan to seize control of the nation's health care system. Now, there is a very real possibility that this seat will go to a Republican, the Democrats who control the state's administrative machinery are planning to postpone the swearing in of Scott Brown (R) until after the final passage of the bill, on the grounds that he has openly stated that he would vote against the measure.
Additionally, his strong showing against Martha Coakley (D), who is the Attorney General of Massachusetts, and has been running on a referendum on Mr. Obama's presidency and against the agenda that has been presented by the Democrats in Congress as well. Oddly enough, the people of Massachusetts, who have the first state mandated/run health care industry are strongly against passage of the bills presently before Congress. In one recent poll, 47% oppose the health care bill to only 41% who express support for it, this is nearly unheard of in a blue/blue state like Massachusetts.
Moreover, when the political double dealing in this matter is made worse when you consider that when Paul Tsongas died in office, his wife, Nikki Tsongas, won the subsequent special election and was sworn in and seated within 48 hours. The election was held on a Tuesday, certified on Wednesday, and she was sworn in on Thursday.
Massachusetts is the almost literally the birthplace of our democracy. After all, the then colonies began to unite when the Intollerable Acts were imposed upon Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1770's. These acts by the British parliament made many American come to the conclusion that our path lay in a different direction than that of the United Kingdom. To see their political decendants actually attempting to subvert the electoral process yet again is disappointing indeed.
UPDATE: When I posted this last week, I got hammered pretty hard for saying that the party controlling Congress would stoop so low as to abrogate the will of the voters. Yet, by yesterday morning, (Sunday, 17 Jan, 2010) pretty much every single blog/news agregate site as well as all of the news networks have posted stories stating exactly what I've written about here. One commenter in particlar accused me of being "an armchair conspiracy theorist." Yet, here we have national commentators saying exactly what I posited last week...draw your own conclusions.
UPDATE: Martha Coakley has conceded the election with 75% of the precincts reporting...Brown 53%, Coakley 46%...we have witnessed history!
UPDATE: Its been a week...when Nikki Tsongas (MA-D) was won a special election to fill her husbands seat, she was elected on Tuesday, certified on Wednesday and seated on Thursday...so what's the difference here? Oh, I forgot, she's a Democrat and Mr. Brown is a Republican.
UPDATE: Today is Feb 3, 2010...it's been 15 days since the election and Mr. Brown STILL hasn't be sworn in...how much longer is the Democratic Secretary of State for Massachusetts going to wait?
This Article has been viewed 887 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsRichard,Thanks for the article and for pointing more of the Dem's underhanded actions. Some day this country will wake up.Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for commenting.
Good 'technical writing (a couple of "So, ... in paragraph 1). Your fervor is evident. You seldom say "President" referring to him as Obama or Mr. O. I agree with most of your articles.Jack, I refer to him as Mr. (just as I did Mr. Bush) because I am a republican and we live in a republic...hence, the office he holds, is merely an office he holds, not a patent of nobility or a title to be held for life...so call me old fashioned or traditional, I call no politician, regarless of party by a title of any sort other than Mr., Mrs. or Miss. Capisci? It's not meant out of discourtesy, it's merely being correct.
Richard, it seems like you and I are on the same page, politically speaking. I enjoy reading your articles. And it's fun to read all of the comments submitted on this piece! God Bless America.My pleasure! THANKS for coming by...take a look at my blog...I would be deeply appreciative if you would: thevailspot dot blogspot dot com...
Good article. Thanks for sharing. I am anxious to see what he outcome on the race will be.My pleasure...the more I've learned over the past couple of days...tells me what I"ve written is literally an under estimation of what is going to happen. I suspect that MA SecState will delay certification the permissible 10 days (though when Paul Tsongas's widow won his seat, the spec election was certified the NEXT day, and sworn in on Thurs-the day after). Then wait the permitted 10 days to swear him in...hoping the Dem's in Congress can pass this horrendous healthc care seizure bill...if they do that...that will enrage a huge portion of the electorate across the country.From what I can read, and hear, the Dem's are figuring to lose 20 seats in Nov...but if they do this underhanded method to pass their agenda, they they will get seriously hammered in Nov and lose at LEAST 70 seats in the House (all of the non-safe seats in Penn are now poling as leaning GOP, where last month they were leaning Dem--that's 9 seats!).Now, that's just one state! Literally all of the 1-2 term Dem seats in the House will be at best...toss up. This will damage the Dem "brand" for decades...and this country can't afford that. Our system is designed for bi partisan passage of major legislation, so that no single party can be "BLAMED" for it if it goes arigh (spelling?)...but this will be catostrophic for our democracy...
You bring some good points to the table, yet unfortunately it isn't just the Democrats at fault. It isn't the Republicans, either. Sure, if it was the GOP there would be more coverage, yet that isn't the problem here. The problem is both parties seem to believe they have the 'right' to gainsay any political legality for their own ends; that is, in their minds, the ends (whatever they happen to be at any particular moment) justify the means (whatever they happen to be able to get away with). Sure, in this case it is the Democrats, yet it could just as easily have been (and has been, as we know) the Republicans. Until we the people realize we are being skewered, this will continue unabated.Nice job.You make some excellent points. I agree that BOTH parties have pretty much screwed up the country, hence thee immense national popularity of the Tea Party movement. I hope that it becomes a genuine political party. Though that remains to be seen if it does so.
I agree wholeheartedly. I don't like seeing it happen. I hope a change comes soon.Jeff, thanks for commenting today. I do appreciate it. him my blog, I have a link in my bio above.
POLITICS are overwhelming to me...you don't know who or what to believe in and I feel so powerless to do anything. I once thought I could make a difference and now I feel the truth is in knowing how insignificant and small I am... May the political tides move in a way pleasing to and affective for the American People and all other governments. Happy 2010 ALL :) Katiethe thing is...you are important. Your vote does count. But you do have to chose wisely HOW you cast it. Therein lies the problem, deciding what political group is the closest to how you feel about your country. You're lucky enough to live in a country I would dearly love to visit, as my mother's family are from the SW...MacFarlane is her maiden name!
Hi Richard. Thank you for this well-written piece. It is going to be very interesting who will win -- Scott Brown or Martha Coakely? ~Nenita~thanks nenita. You live right next door in RI...what's your take? Your Congressman, Kennedy, kept mispronouncing Martha's name as "Marcia" yesterday....lol.Yeah, I heard that, too. The Scott Brown and Martha Coakely TV ads are aired constantly in Rhode Island. There are Rhode Islanders who volunteered their time to man a phone bank in Wrentham, MA, the hometown of Scott Brown. Scott Brown's win will mean that the Republicans will be able to break the Democrats' "super majority" -- this would be a very significant senatorial race.
~Nenita~
Great article, Richard----food for thought. Thanks for sharing and Welcome to Searchwarp.SandraThanks Sandra, I appreciate your taking the time to read and rate.Rich
This article is not of my interest it may be a good article but i can not comment on it.Dr. Ahmad, if an article is "not of your interest" then skip it rather than giving it such low marks. It adversely affects the rating level of the story when you give it such very low marks. SO....in the future, just hit the skip key, unless you believe the story to be of such low quality, only then, give it a marking.
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.