Question in the title is pretty straightforward. Can a US Senator, having been elected in for example 2010, decide to run for his state’s other Senate seat (in 2012 or 2014)?
I know it’s an awful idea. Just wondering if there has ever been an attempt or if the law specifically addresses it.
For example, Senator Bob Nutsnype (D-QQ, elected 2006) has just been key in the passage of the Free Money for Everybody Act, and his popularity is at 95% in his home state…for now. Could he decide to re-up in 2010 by going after his state’s other seat instead of waiting for 2012?
This does open up some icky follow up questions:
[ul]
[li]If the Senator successfully moves seats, what happens to his seniority?[/li][li]If the Senator successfully moves seats, what happens to his old seat?[/li][li]I’m assuming if the attempt fails then the Senator keeps his old seat. Right?[/li][/ul]
Interesting question. I can’t think of any reason it would be disallowed, but like you said it does seem rather pointless. I’d be amazed if it ever happened.
I would assume that Question2 would be answered by the governor appointing a replacement senator until the next regular election for that seat, just as if the former senator had died or resigned.
I conclude 'possible but impractical" in a very roundabout way.
The Constitution says that each state will have two Senators. So Senator A can’t be elected or appointed to senate seat B without resigning from seat A. Resigning forfeits all seniority.
And the 17th Amendment provides that “When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.” Therefore, seat A could only be filled by an interim appointment.
So Senator Nutsnype, currently holding seat A through 2012, could run for seat B in 2010, but if he won, he’d have to resign seat A, and lose his seniority. The governor would then appoint an interim senator for seat A, and that person would hold seat A until state law calls for a new election, which wouldn’t be any later than 2012 in any case.
Odds are Senator Nutsnype’s opponent in 2010 would remind the voters that Nutsnype is attempting to trade the clout his state has in the Senate in exchange for a steady paycheck for four extra years, which might erode that 95% popularity.
The two senators are two separate offices. Switching the class would be like switching from the House to the Senate, or from the Senate to the presidency. While it could be managed (the two Senators resign and the Governor appoints them back to the two different positions), that sort of thing would probably not sit well with the voters.
Seniority is anything the party caucus says it is. If the party wants to continue a seated Senator’s seniority, it can. It’s done so for people like Joe Lieberman and Arlen Specter in situations which are similar, although obviously not identical.
States decide how they want to handle resignations and deaths. Massachusetts famously now has an election rather than an appointment. And most states have legislation that commands the governor to respect the party in an appointment. However, in states that don’t, this could conceivably be a way to switch a seat from one party to another. There would be huge repercussions, but it’s a possible scenario. (More for a political novel than reality, but hey, half of the news today sounds like a novel.)
It has been done, kind of. Slade Gorton lost his bid for re-election for one of the state’s Senate seats. But then two years later he got elected to the other seat.
I can’t think of a situation in which a sitting senator has run for another senate seat. I suspect that unless the sitting senator resigned from his current seat, it would strike everyone as too strange.
Possibly. But IIRC, Huey Long was the sitting governor and ran for the Senate seat. He won, but decided to finish his term as governor leaving LA without a 2nd senator for those two years. So, that’s not without precedent.
Why couldn’t the same man hold both seats and have two votes?
Thanks for the good responses, everybody. The “both resign, Governor re-appoints” alley is interesting.
One thing that’s been overlooked so far is that the Senate could just refuse to seat Nutsnype when he comes back. They probably would do so if the switch seemed like funny business was behind it. Then I presume he presses the case to the Supreme Court.
e: I looked it up and the above re:Huey Long is correct. His excuse for leaving the seat empty for two years was “with Ransdell as Senator, the seat was vacant anyway.”
I’m going to be a constitutional literalist on this one and say that the Constitution says each state will have two Senators, not just two votes in the Senate, and that means two different people.
Long’s shenanigans, as well as others, brought about a wave of electoral reform. In 1960 Lyndon Johnson ran for Vice President AND for re-election to the Senate at the same time (talk about covering your bets!) The Texas Constitution now reads “No person shall hold or exercise at the same time, more than one civil office of emolument.”
And the Louisiana Constitution now states “The legislature shall enact laws defining and regulating dual employment and defining, regulating, and prohibiting dual officeholding in state and local government.”
Of course, those are provisions of state constitutions. Not every state says the same thing (Missouri’s restrictions are even more stringent). If you can find a state that doesn’t specifically forbid holding two offices, go for it.
The death of Robert Byrd made me think of a variation of this theme. Suppose Jay Rockefeller gets appointed to Byrd’s seat and another person gets named to Rockefeller’s seat. Note that Byrd’s seat is up for election in 2012 while Rockefeller’s is in 2014. This would give the new person an extra 2 years in office before having to face an election, which can be a big help. (Joe Manchin is also a Democrat and so such a deal could in theory be arranged.)
(BTW: In my state no one can run for two offices at the same time, even in a primary. So a US rep., for example, cannot run for re-election and a senate seat at the same time. This is how we get rid of our worst reps., their ambition leads them to run for higher office which they lose since the whole state isn’t dumb enough to vote for them.)
And Joe Biden did it in 2008. These guys want to make sure they have a job, so they are going to run for reelection and higher office at the same time unless it’s not allowed. I don’t think many states have passed laws like the ones kunilou mentioned.
Lloyd Bentsen also did it in 1988. Texas hasn’t changed it’s law in reaction to Lyndon Johnson. I don’t think many people considered it “shenanigans.” Nobody thought he was expecting to serve in both offices.
I was just going to post about Bentsen in 1988 and Biden in 2008, as well. Texas law still permits it, as far as I know.
The OP’s scenario occurred to me as the premise of a political novel awhile back, as it happens. I could see Adam Able, a popular U.S. senator from one party running to unseat Bob Baker, his reviled fellow senator from the other party, if there were no other likely contenders in Able’s party as Baker’s reelection year loomed. Able need not resign his seat to run against Baker, but could see what the voters decided and then resign and take Baker’s seat (and still keep his Senate seniority, if his caucus were so inclined, as Exapno Mapcase notes).
Or, depending upon state law, Able could, upon winning Baker’s seat, refuse to resign, fail to take the seat, and then let the governor (assuming she was of Able’s party) appoint someone else to fill the vacancy left by Baker’s defeat. Although I agree this would leave a bad taste in most voters’ mouths, it could make for an interesting political thriller.
Not only can a Senator switch classes, it has happened.
Kent Conrad was elected to the Senate from North Dakota in 1986, for a term running from January 3, 1987 to January 3, 1993. He declined to seek reelection in 1992, honoring a pledge not to do so if he had been unsuccessful in reducing the deficit.
In the meantime, the other ND Senator, Quentin Burdick, died on September 8, 1992. The Governor scheduled a special election for December 4, 1992. Burdick’s supporters urged him to run in the special election, as this would not be a direct violation of his earlier pledge. He did so (while still serving as a lame-duck Senator in the other seat), and won.
He was thus eligible to hold either Senate seat until January 3, 1993, although Congress wasn’t in session so there was nothing to do. He resigned the old seat on December 14, 1992 and was sworn into the new. He has since been reelected and continues to serve as Senator to this day.
The Democratic caucus has credited him with continuous service and seniority dating to January 3, 1987.
By the way, Huey Long didn’t leave the Louisiana seat vacant for two years. The seat was nominally vacant from March 4, 1931 to January 25, 1932, but Congress in those days didn’t meet until December, so it was really more like two months.
