Cecil’s column on an alien-species possibly being able to become president reminded me of something I’ve been wondering for some time. In the last Missouri election when Carnahan died, he certaintly was no longer a person. How was it then that he stayed on the ballot. I realize it would have been seen as poor taste for Ashcroft to take it to court, but surely a person who no longer exists can constitutionally be elected to the senate. I mean could Republicans nominate Abe Lincoln for a senate seat, and the Dem’s Thomas Jefferson. Surely that would be a neat contest to see. 
Carnahan died less than a month before the election, and by that time it was too late for the Democrats to replace his name on the ballot. Therefore, the acting governor, Roger Wilson, said that he’d name Jean Carnahan to the seat if her husband won. Think of it this way. Missourians said that on January 3rd (the day Senators are inaugurated) they’d want an empty Senate seat that Jean Carnahan was named to rather than Singin’ John Ashcroft.
Ashcroft and the GOP entertained the idea of challenging the election on the basis that Mel Carnahan was dead and ineligible, but they determined that such a move would have been a very poor PR move.
Missouri’s elections in 2000 were a bit shaky in their legitimacy, but Florida gave it cover.
Thanks, BobT what’s pretty much what i suspected.
To Burger, I understand the facts surrounding the situation, but my question isn’t whether our not the public got what they wanted. Obviously, it was essentially the same effect as his wife’s name being on the ballot. My question is - Was it technically speaking legal? M Carnahan no longer existed, so the balllot might as well had Santa Claus on it. He was not a person, nor was he any longer a resident of Missouri. Therefore, it just seems to me that the he could never have technically been elected in order to have been replaced. Again, I understand WHY it happened the way it happened, I just don’t understand how it is legal.
Ultimately, Jean Carnahan was seated in the Senate because the other 99 senators said it was OK. The Senate gets to make the final call on who gets a seat.
The Constitution does say that a senator must be an “inhabitant” of the state s/he represents. Some Republicans also argued that Missouri’s governor at the time violated the Hatch Act by promising someone (Jean Carnahan) a political office in exchange for a vote (for Mel Carnahan).
Remember, while the constitution and senate rules determine who can be a senator, state laws determine who can be on the ballot. If the ballot names a candidate, and he’s elected, then that’s who goes to the Senate, which determines the final qualifications. I suppose a state party could nominate someone who isn’t qualified to be Senator and have him elected, though the Senate would determine whether to seat the guy (not that it’d happen).
It’s not unheard of for something like this to happen. In the 80s, the candidate for town supervisor where I live died a week before election (on what was supposed to have been a televised debate). He was reelected to office; it was too late to change the ballots.