Alaska Senate Race Update; No Palin Can't Appoint Herself
Time to put to bed the rumors of Gov. Sarah Palin appointing herself to should Stevens win and then resign, news stories to the contrary.
Citizen reaction to former Governor Murkowski appointing his daughter, Lisa, to a vacant Senate seat in 2002 was a 2004 ballot initiative stripping the Governor of this power (56% to 44%). According to the Alaska Elections website (pdf), the 2002 initiative "repeal[s] state law by which theGovernor makes a temporary appointment of a person tofill a U.S. Senate vacancy until a special or regularelection can be held."
Under the initiative the seat would remain vacant until the election is certified and the senate meets. Existing law provides that a special election will be held within 60 to 90 days tofill a vacancy unless the vacancy occurs within 60 days of the primary election for that seat. This initiative does not change that provision.
The 2002 explanation continues: "This measure does not authorize appointment of a U.S. Senator."
Period. End of story.
That said, she could certainly resign as governor and >run for any vacant seat. (She might not even have to resign.) But she can't appoint herself or her husband or anyone else, according to the explanation that the state provided to citizens in 2002.
Comments
I’m no expert in Alaska election law, but the Anchorage Daily News ran a story on this, saying the issue is far less simple than this article would make it seem.
Basically, the issue is whether the 2004 ballot initiative is constitutional. The 17th Amendment to the US Constitution gives state legislatures the power to make rules for temporary appointments to the Senate. There is Supreme Court precedent for the idea that when the Constitution gives a legislature authority over an issue, the issue must be addressed by the legislature itself rather than by ballot initiative. See Alaska v. Trust the People, 113 P.3d 613 (Alaska 2005); Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221 (1920).
Thanks, BT — I should have noted that “I am not a lawyer” and I did not check on the constitutionality of the 2004 ballot initiative.
I believe that any governor who ignored that sentiment would be shooting him or herself in the foot, however.
Does seem, though, that Palin could resign and the Lt. Governor temporarily appoint Palin as US Senator until the special election is held. Am I reading that wrong?
If what this article says is correct, then no governor of Alaska, period, can appoint a senator to replace Stevens. Only a special election can make the choice, which pretty much ensures a blue seat since (1) Stevens will (not may) be expelled if he tries to take a seat in the senate as a felon (the Republicans can’t have that kind of PR against them) and (2) given the post-election political climate a red is unlikely to win the special election.
Hi, AZJoe — Palin could resign and run for the Senate. I’ve not read up on AK succession, but in such an event one presumes that the LtGov ascends.
However, as EdwardV points out — if the initiative passed by the people in 2004 is constitutional, not even an acting governor could appoint an interim Senator.
And as I noted in response to BT, even if it’s not constitutional, I think any politician who ignored this voter sentiment would be reckless with their career.
The Alaska ballot initiative, which is clearly unconstitutional, was mostly a reaction against nepotism, as Murkowski appointed his daughter to his own vacated Senate seat. In the same election in which the ballot initiative was passed Lisa Murkowski was elected to a full Senate term. It’s not clear that the voter sentiment would be negative if Palin made an apppointment or got herself appointed to the seat.
If she wants to be the Senator from Alaska all she has to do is run for the office. Why should she resign being Governor to run for the Senate? Did she resign to run as VP?
Hi, Doug — I did not check the state law to see if she has to resign to run for the special election for Senate.
Hi, MrMax — it seems if the initiative were _clearly_ unconstitutional that it would not have made the ballot or that fact would have been made so clear that voters would have rejected it.