Feingold's amendment: Feingold (Begich, Durbin, and McCain) is sponsoring a bill that would amend the Constitution to provide that Senate vacancies are always filled by a special election instead of governor's appointment. The LA Times has written an op-ed in opposition to this amendment ("Feinstein Right, Feingold Wrong"), which is interesting to me for two reasons: it further divides me on how I feel about this issue and it raises a very important question that few have talked about, but that would cut across many of the electoral problems we have nowadays--why do we even have states?
'State's rights' has a bad reputation, a hangover from Southern resistance to racial integration, but as long as states exist (and have equal representation in the Senate) they ought to be able to decide whether waiting for an election is worth an empty seat in the Senate.
It falls short, though, of asking the next logical step of 'Why nation(state)s'?
No comments:
Post a Comment