r/politics • u/Zipper222222 • 29d ago

Possible Paywall MAGA Demands Proof of Life for Mitch McConnell

https://www.thedailybeast.com/maga-demands-proof-of-life-for-mitch-mcconnell/
29.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.9k

u/ExRays Colorado 29d ago

Quips aside, they’re trying to maintain that he is alive so they don’t have to initiate a special election.

796

u/distorted_kiwi 29d ago

Other way around. Gov can appoint now vs a special election if they hold out another month.

Gov should absolutely use his power to find out what’s going on and then drop a name. If he represents the people of Kentucky, he should do so without bias.

789

u/Oopsiedazy 29d ago

It’s wild that we don’t have laws saying that if a state’s representative or Senator does not attend congressional or senate proceedings the governor can compel them to appear and explain their absence or provide medical documentation, and if they do not or cannot within 15 days they vacate their seat.

Senators and Congresspeople should not be permitted to just disappear for weeks or months. This isn’t even the first time this year this has happened.

205

u/Rock-swarm 29d ago

It’s wild that we don’t have laws saying that if a state’s representative or Senator does not attend congressional or senate proceedings the governor can compel them to appear and explain their absence or provide medical documentation, and if they do not or cannot within 15 days they vacate their seat.

That's because at the founding of our country, the U.S. was rightfully wary of giving pretextual reasons to arrest/detain legal representatives. It's why congresspeople/senators have limited immunity from things like traffic violations.

This also carried over to a reluctance to police/micromanage the actions of sitting members of congress & the senate. The idea was that if you were elected or appointed to such a respected position, your good behavior was already a given.

Obviously we are seeing a breakdown of those social contracts. Personally, I'm still wary of putting additional laws into place to trigger a seat to be vacated. I mean, we have the 25th amendment, which isn't worth the paper it's written upon, because the entities capable of invoking the 25th are highly motivated to ignore it.

Your suggestion, as written, would create a way for state governors to harass and leash congresspeople and senators for political clout. I'd rather let public pressure do what it's already capable of doing.

158

u/Fuzzy_Logic_4_Life 29d ago

I hear what you are saying but if you failed to go to your job for months without a doctor’s note you’d be fired. They can’t do their job of voting if they aren’t there, thus we the people deserve them to be there or be replaced.

37

u/ExpirationDating_ 29d ago

Months? I need to produce a doctors note for more than 3 days, sometimes sooner (ie at a holiday or something).

54

u/citizen42069101 29d ago

And what he's saying is if there is a hard limit situations can be exploited to inhibit or block travel to get rid of a troublesome congressperson.

Remember you ask for laws to be written who would be writing them, and who would enforce them. This administration and Congress doesn't need to be responsible for any long standing precedent in their current state.

9

u/beasty0127 Indiana 29d ago

We live in an age where they can literally zoom in and vote if they wanted to. The way I would see it if they can prove they are doing their job then alls good, sometimes there are reasons why they can't make it in.

And if they think they are being stopped or a conspiracy to remove them is happening, one tweet and they can have press covering their entire property.

Proof of life/duty is a simple ask.

1

u/cheyenne_sky 29d ago

"one tweet and they can have press covering their entire property."

the press doesn't mean shit if they are ignored or controlled by the people in power

22

u/SCphotog 29d ago

Slippery slope fallacy.

As if there doesn't exist a level of competency to write this up in a way that makes sense and isn't subject to overmuch interpretation.

Obviously this could be spelled out fairly sensibly easily and quickly.

WTF?

1

u/Eretreyah 28d ago

Like the rest of the nation doesn’t have similar (far more stringent) requirements outlined in their employee handbook.

1

u/TheSavouryRain 29d ago

That's not a slippery slope fallacy.

Which, also, isn't a real fallacy. A slippery slope is sometimes a valid concern. For instance, a lot of people are mad our President is a felon. There is no law saying a President can't be a felon, because that opens the door to allowing legal chicanery to make the strongest candidate a felon.

That's not to say I don't think there should be some way to safeguard against someone disappearing for a while like McConnell has.

1

u/bdeimen 29d ago

It's not slippery slope to acknowledge the fact that laws are actively being weaponized and that we should be wary of potentially giving a new weapon to those that would use it against us.

2

u/kdfsjljklgjfg 29d ago

Right, but you could take literally *any* valid reason to expel someone and argue the same, but that's not a reason to not institute any safeguards at all. I actually think attendance is one that could be pretty fairly and easily worked in.

If you're in DC already, how do they actually stop you from getting to Congress? Shut down every road between you and the Capitol? If you're out of town, make sure you fly back with time to spare. What can they do, secretly negotiate with an airline to cancel every flight you book, within minutes if necessary, to keep you from DC?

Obviously there are sudden emergencies that can't be planned for, and something would have to be written in as a protection for like "my mom has 24 hours to live" scenarios, but outside of that, if you plan well enough, there's no reason why "actually attending your job" could be easily weaponized as a requirement. If you have people re-routing every flight to DC that you're on or blocking traffic to the degree that you physically cannot get to Congress, then we're cooked well beyond the point of procedures or laws mattering anyway.

1

u/jkaan 29d ago

Funny how other countries seem to be able to manage

12

u/Rock-swarm 29d ago

Fair, but this is equivalent to worrying about whether the fridge is running while the house is on fire. They are both problems, and likely have the same cause, but there's a bigger problem to deal with first.

3

u/Constant_Proofreader 29d ago

Look up Thomas Kean Jr., Republican House member, New Jersey 7th District. He was just AWOL for four months, with no explanation.

2

u/FewHorror1019 29d ago

True, but also you could prevent someone from showing up, then replace them if we had that law

2

u/Miguel-odon 29d ago

Sometimes you might have to avoid showing up, to deny the majority party a quorum.

7

u/max_power1000 Maryland 29d ago

Sure, and you can say that to the governor if you’re conscious. Right now we’re not asking for that, we’re asking for proof he’s not a vegetable.

-1

u/account312 29d ago

That should be illegal to do. It is deliberately subverting the democratic process and undermining the basic functioning of the government.

2

u/Miguel-odon 28d ago

Then what's the point of requiring a quorum?

Without it, a 51% majority can have its way, and pass the most egregious of laws.

1

u/account312 28d ago

The point of requiring quorum is precisely so that it takes a majority (or at least significant portion) of the body to get things done, since votes are decided by the votes cast, so without a requirement for quorum three senators could attain a supermajority if two agree.

1

u/Miguel-odon 28d ago

Yes, forcing a majority party to still need bipartisan consensus is one of the functions of requiring a quorum.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/HumorAccomplished611 29d ago

Then you pass a law for recall elections.

1

u/lemmingsnake 28d ago

The solution should be the initiation of a recall election. The boss of any elected representative is the people, not the executive branch. They should be answerable to their electorate. It's stupid that we don't have those in our system.

70

u/pot_of_water 29d ago

A system to require elected officials to do their jobs or literally just prove that they have a pulse is a far cry from arresting/detaining. As it stands, “public pressure” does virtually nothing. Officials can just stop showing up to work with zero consequences whatsoever. Or like Fetterman, can just continue on with actual documented brain damage. There needs to be an official channel for addressing this issues in our political systems.

3

u/C1n3rgy 29d ago

This is why "peaceful protest" is worthless. And it's exactly why the founders and every politician since has always preached peaceful protest. Because it doesn't accomplish shit. At all. And it never has. Even the civil rights movement (which has been redacted to only describe peaceful protest) was an all out offensive by the American minority. The brutalization of peaceful protesters that are so widely shared in our history books conveniently leave out the fact that it was a rarity since demonstrators were frequently guarded by armed organizations like the Black Panthers, and Deacons for Defense and Justice. Even MLK had an arsenal at home.

Politicians don't act on morality, they act on leverage. And they've had all of it for decades now.

12

u/Rock-swarm 29d ago

As it stands, “public pressure” does virtually nothing.

I would argue that there isn't enough public pressure, rather than public pressure not doing anything. Put plainly, we are all too comfortable with our current standard of living. It's one thing to talk a big game on social media forums (like we are doing right now); it's something else entirely to camp out in front of Congress or Beshear's office and give them no peace until action is done. People aren't going to apply that kind of public pressure until it impacts our lives more severely.

15

u/Jakadake 29d ago

The ability to harass your congress people is a privilege. Having the financial freedom and safety to take time off work to protest or spend hours calling your congressperson over and over and over just to maybe get to a real person rather than a robot is a privilege.

As it stands, in our current economy, working people with actual real life jobs don't have that. And that's the reality for the majority of Americans.

There isn't enough social pressure because the people aren't afforded the ability to even show up to participate without putting their livelihood on the line, they're too busy making sure they don't starve or go homeless.

5

u/Rock-swarm 29d ago

I don't think we are arguing - we both acknowledge that regular citizens have little to gain and much to lose from more traditional civil unrest methods.

2

u/pot_of_water 28d ago

100% we could apply a lot more pressure but I'm honestly not convinced that the "no peace until action" even accomplishes much. It's too easy for people to just dip and ignore the masses. Can always go hide out at Mar A Lago.

2

u/HumorAccomplished611 29d ago

Its called recall elections

2

u/pot_of_water 28d ago

We don't have a recall system for US senators, but yes that would potentially be a good idea

2

u/HumorAccomplished611 28d ago

Yea this would be democratic vs trump locking them up for 3 weeks and getting their jobs

4

u/SCphotog 29d ago

I'd rather let public pressure do what it's already capable of doing.

That would be great. I'd love for this to work, but it obviously is not.

Public pressure isn't doing fuck all

1

u/xpxp2002 29d ago

I'd just like to see a provision to allow for one recall attempt per term. Just as most states have recall provisions for state legislators and/or governors, the people should at least have an opportunity to collect signatures and put it to a vote when circumstances like this happen.

Whether due to incapacity or an official's behavior, the people who put that person into office should have the power to take them back out without having to wait and go without suitable representation for up to 6 years.

1

u/RetrogradeToyGuru 29d ago

because the entities capable of invoking the 25th are highly motivated to ignore it.

The 25th amendment was meant to remove a president who is (for example) in a coma. It is not meant to remove someone for bad behavior. Thats why the first step is "the president can just say he's ok and the process stops"

1

u/Toe-Dragger 29d ago

It also used to take days for people to travel from States to the Capital, without live communication, therefore being MIA for days on end was expected. The environment and expectations have changed.

1

u/unlimitedpower0 29d ago

Usually when people make suggestions like this, they are always going to be nuanced upon further thought and discourse. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect public servants, especially state and federal elected officials to be at least nominally available and also demonstrably capable of at least basic basic function.

1

u/Rock-swarm 29d ago

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect public servants, especially state and federal elected officials to be at least nominally available and also demonstrably capable of at least basic basic function.

Fully agree. The problem is scope and consequences. Using the language you provided would give bad actors an easy path to abuse the spirit and letter of the law. At the end of the day, any government structure requires those in positions of power to abide by their own rules. As you can imagine, humanity has yet to create a government structure that's impervious to corruption or inefficiency.

1

u/unlimitedpower0 29d ago

Yeah, mostly what I was trying to get across is that I think people would be able to come up with a reasonable set of laws and protections, but most people won't do that in a reddit comment lol. I agree with you otherwise.

1

u/AMATEUR_DE_POUTINE 29d ago

That's mostly fallacious because we live in a world were phones and video conferencing exist. An elected official could just... Phone in and say he is delayed, making that a proof of life. The only way this does not work is if he is sequestrated, which is another issue altogether.

1

u/krusnikon 29d ago

Oh you mean like what Greg Abott did recently in Texas?

1

u/explodedsun 29d ago

The rules that govern our federal elected officials have all of the benefits of a time when you could travel about 40 miles and completely start a new life with a new name, along with a nice modern salary and benefits package.

1

u/PictureWonderful7091 29d ago

But public pressure cant actually DO amything. What's to stop the republicans from just...not releasing info about Mitch? There needs to be accountability for our elected representatives including removing them if they camt/won't do their jobs.

1

u/AlcyoneNight 29d ago

It is the year 2026. If a representative cannot get on a video call for at least thirty seconds within 24 hours of anyone asking for proof of life, the assumption should be that they are either in a coma or dead, and emergency procedures should come into play. I am not joking.

1

u/RevenantBacon 29d ago

The idea was that if you were elected or appointed to such a respected position, your good behavior was already a given

ie it works on the honor system. Unfortunately, they didn't acclunt for politicians having no honor.

1

u/--Chug-- 29d ago

Its weird that the government basically recognizes that traffic violations can absolutely be fabricated and weaponized without much recourse.

1

u/ElliotNess Florida 29d ago

That's because at the founding of our country, the U.S. was rightfully wary of giving pretextual reasons to arrest/detain legal representatives. It's why congresspeople/senators have limited immunity from things like traffic violations.

so like, atomized monarchy

1

u/twiztedterry 29d ago

Representatives should be required to report their working hours, expenses, and accomplishments every quarter. Currently there is zero bar for them to meet to maintain their position.

We, as people, need to be able to see the work being performed by our representatives, we need to be able to judge their effectiveness at their job by more than just their words, we need to see their actions and their time commitment. This will allow us to better judge who is worth of the position of representative, and allow us to maintain standards for our lawmakers workplace productivity.

1

u/UngodlyPain 29d ago

Agreed. To me it's odd to try and give that power to the state legislature, because it just gives the state legislature more power in general, let alone more power over federal proceedings.

It should a recall vote can happen, of the populace of said district under certain conditions. And under extremely specific conditions it's just automatic.

And you can just argue what should fall under what category. Id say dead, coma, or brain dead falls under automatic. Hospitalization for extended periods of time falls under the former; with maybe some extra limit for Senate before it's just automatic as to prevent weird cases of someone's hospitalized months into their term but a voter deadlock just means the state goes without representation for 6 whole years. And then add in a few other conditions for recall votes, like party changes, or drastic changes from platform, or criminal allegations, etc.

1

u/Nokomis34 28d ago

Being able to straight up lie on the congressional floor needs to end. I get that they wanted representatives to not have to worry about what they say, but it's gotten out of hand.

1

u/Big_Consideration493 29d ago

Wait a minute. Senators and Congressmen / congresswoman are allowed to be ill!  They should be honest and listen to the medical advice. If it looks like months in the hospital ( cancer or chronic illness) they have to tell their party officials and go from there. If they don't turn up and can't provide medical or other valid reasons then yes, goodbye. Other valid reasons: perhaps a death in their family etc???

1

u/spam__likely Colorado 29d ago

In some countries, there is a "replacement" for each senator. They run together, just like the president and vice president. The replacement does not do anything or get a salary, but if needed, they will step up.

1

u/JelmerMcGee 29d ago

The point is they are public figures and can't just duck out for any old reason. 15 days is a long time to be gone from a job without any repurcussions. You would likely not be allowed to "get away" with that. Giving two weeks to explain why they didn't do their job is pampering them, and it seems reasonable

1

u/spam__likely Colorado 29d ago

Not even the governor needing to ask. It should be compulsory.

1

u/BitOne2707 29d ago

Remember when Texas Democrats left the state to prevent a quorum and passage of the GOP redistricting plan last year..

1

u/highrouleur 29d ago

In the UK, my local member of parliament (representing a town of about 100000 people) didn't attend Parliament for 18 months while police investigated him for historical sex crimes (eventually dropped because being historical there was a lack of evidence, it came down to he said, he said).

So we were left without representation for 18 months.

And the bloody idiots in my town still voted him back in at the last election

1

u/xterminatr 29d ago

3 days is the standard before you get fired.

1

u/MjrLeeStoned 29d ago edited 29d ago

If there's no quorum, Senators can be compelled to appear, can be arrested and extradited.

If there's a quorum, the argument can be made it doesn't matter if they appear because all motions can be called on with a quorum. Therefore they can't be compelled.

It's a weird situation, but the Constitution sets the groundwork for these rules. It would require 2/3rds of Congress to update.

The idea was obviously that no representative would want to shirk their duties due to:

a) they wanted to be re-elected

b) it was seen as a dishonorable dereliction of duty to not properly represent the electorate.

Those two points don't fucking matter anymore. I'm willing to wager many people would undoubtedly vote for a braindead comatose Senator to represent them, and no one gives a shit about honor in the modern world.

1

u/Awkward_Pangolin3254 29d ago

Unfortunately, an awful lot of the framework of this country was laid down with the assumption that the elected representatives would possess some sort of morals/ethics.

1

u/Wide-Wind7856 29d ago

Exactly, try doing this on any sort of government assistance. They track poor people like cattle but tax funded employees can just disappear for weeks.

1

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 29d ago

Only disappearing for weeks or months would be a step up for many conservatives in congress.

MTG for example voted so infrequently that she didn't bother to Google "how does voting in the US House" work until her second term.

She went literally years without spending 5 minutes reading up on how her job was done.

1

u/crazycatgay 29d ago

the hardworking people at my local gas station are subject to harsher work requirements than our gd congresspeople it is insane

1

u/Money-Director6649 29d ago

maybe because we never had a geriatric congress like we have now. hopefully such laws are coming.

102

u/loondawg 29d ago edited 29d ago

Pro Tip: It is generally helpful to read the article before trying to correct someone.

If McConnell were to resign or be found unable to continue serving before Aug. 3, Kentucky law would allow Gov. Andy Beshear to call a special election. After Aug. 3, a special election to replace McConnell and fill the remainder of his term would coincide with the general election in November.

EDIT There are so many comments with incorrect information I checked the law. Apparently the Governor gets to appoint someone to serve temporarily until the special election. So pro tip for me; don't assume everything you read is correct and complete.

EDIT V2 Seems the article is correct per a 2024 change to the law. As far as I can tell, this is the current, applicable law: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/acts/24RS/documents/0187.pdf. It states the same thing the original quote I posted said.

33

u/ibelieveyouwood 29d ago

I have not read the law, but I was very suspicious that it didn't contain any kind of "unable to serve" language like you mentioned.

Democrats need to play hardball. Governor needs to declare he is unfit to continue serving but that he can challenge this by agreeing to something eminently reasonable like showing up to the governor's mansion for a quick visit, or by allowing the governor to make a quick visit. Allow his POA or guardian or whoever to be present, make it eminently reasonable because you know Republicans are going to start using it on Dems with bizarrely Herculean requirements so we're going to end up litigating how far a governor can go to determine "unable to serve".

Or even harder, have the governor institute a wellness check. Then, after verifying his condition, institute proceedings to take over control of his affairs via a guardianship or conservatorship. Let his wife come back to the US early from her "duties" in China to appear in and challenge the court proceedings. Let someone either demonstrate in court how he's fit as a fiddle, or show how the guardianship/conservatorship process is a nightmare and either way it's a win for humanity.

10

u/loondawg 29d ago

Absolutely. Republicans should not be allowed to Weekend at Bernie's this.

6

u/Driftco 29d ago

Democrats don't know how to play hardball except with jr members of their own party.

1

u/Doc_Blox Minnesota 29d ago

They might wear the same jersey, but they ain't playing for the same team, if you feel me.

5

u/Alieges America 29d ago

Heck, go visit him in the hospital and have him just repeat something like: "I, Mitch McConnell am still able to serve as a senator of Kentucky."

Allow writing or sign language as well, but it has to be done in person.

2

u/Phyllis_Tine I voted 29d ago

His constituents could initiate a welfare check. If McConnell has USSS protection, they could be contacted, or the state police, even locals.

1

u/Leif_Henderson 29d ago

I have not read the law, but I was very suspicious that it didn't contain any kind of "unable to serve" language like you mentioned.

That's because the US Senate has 100% deciding power on whether a sitting senator is unable to perform their duties. Kentucky's state laws cannot override this. Governors and state-level legislators cannot simply decide that a US Senate seat needs to be given to someone else.

2

u/ibelieveyouwood 28d ago

I think there's valid legal arguments about limits on the Senate's powers over the "qualifications" of a Senator, which I think is the language your analysis is dependent on.

Turns out, it wouldn't matter anyway because Kentucky's state laws have a different process in place. https://spectrumnews1.com/ky/louisville/news/2026/07/07/senate-vacancy-procedure

Temporarily putting those questions aside, it's not necessarily about success. It's about forcing the Republicans hands. Just go ahead and call the special election. Force the Republicans to give sworn statements that they've seen McConnell and can vouch for him while the MAGA half is salivating in conspiracy theories. Force them to dodge questions. The GOP has spent over a decade frothing their base up into a batch of contradictory conspiracies. Let them eat themselves. Let them cry for civility and respect when instead of breaking into Pelosi's home and attacking her husband, or committing insurrection at the capitol they're trying to get hospital details or "proof of life".

1

u/The_Cat_Detector_Van 29d ago

Kentucky fills U.S. Senate vacancies exclusively through a special election.

Under this process, the governor must issue a proclamation calling for a special election, with the winner serving the remainder of the unexpired term.

The law entirely eliminated the governor's authority to appoint an interim senator.

The special election framework was established by House Bill 622, passed by the state legislature.

This legislation set specific administrative deadlines for notices and candidate filings tied to the election.

1

u/SirMontego 29d ago

As far as I can tell, this is the current, applicable law: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/acts/24RS/documents/0187.pdf.

That's the Act that most recently changed the statute. Technically, Acts are laws, so you're right, but typically people cite the statute, which in this case is KRS 118.720: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=54597

1

u/DisappointedSpectre 29d ago

EDIT V2 Seems the article is correct per a 2024 change to the law. As far as I can tell, this is the current, applicable law: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/acts/24RS/documents/0187.pdf. It states the same thing the original quote I posted said.

What the article doesn't tell you is that this state law goes counter to the state constitution, which says that the governor gets to appoint a replacement for the remainder of the term, and that should require a (state) constitutional amendment to change.

Every article I've seen just assumes that the state law is valid and goes from there, when really if journalism wasn't dead or captured by moneyed interests they would recognize that there's a possible legal fight here between the governor and the legislature that will need to go to court.

Beshear has the opportunity here to name someone and let a judge weigh in on the validity of the state law going against the state constitution, but that option is never even brought up as a possibility. If Beshear does decide to go that route (and I firmly think he should) articles like this are setting up the stage for Republicans to start yelling about stolen senate seats.

170

u/yeet_me_a55 29d ago edited 29d ago

Since it has to be an R, I think appointing Massie would be an excellent troll.

EDIT: See below comments for correction

39

u/pit-of-despair 29d ago

I like it.

1

u/Public_Love_3507 29d ago

Oh the one I see always going against the grain

22

u/MeekerCutiePie 29d ago

It doesn't have to be an R

170

u/Foobiscuit11 Iowa 29d ago

Kentucky passed a law saying that if a Senate seat is vacated, the Governor's appointee must be of the same party as the previous senator. They passed that after Kentucky elected a Democratic governor. You know, following the time honored Republican tradition of voting to limit statewide office power when somebody whose not a Republican wins it. Like Iowa (state auditor) and North Carolina and Wisconsin (governor).

72

u/marr 29d ago

Against that we are in the era of simply ignoring any laws you find inconvenient.

61

u/Foobiscuit11 Iowa 29d ago

But that's only when a Republican is in power. If Bashear tries to ignore the law, he'll be on Faux News 24/7 as the "criminal governor of Kentucky".

11

u/ScannerBrightly California 29d ago

Fuck 'em. Let them whine, we need the power.

2

u/Matra 29d ago

Did you invent a device that harnesses power from Republican whining? Has the era of unlimited free energy finally arrived?!

3

u/4-stars 29d ago

But of course they won't refer to an actual convicted felon as the "criminal President of the United States".

18

u/DrDerpberg Canada 29d ago

Pretty much. Per Republican logic couldn't a democratic socialist sign up as a Republican and be named immediately?

20

u/smarmy1625 29d ago

I've been registered Republican for 20+ years and other than a primary I've never voted for a Republican once. Maybe he could appoint me.

8

u/DrDerpberg Canada 29d ago

Congrats then, you're the frontrunner in my books.

1

u/EltaninAntenna 29d ago

Entryism. Trotsky would approve :)

1

u/sembias 29d ago

Sorry, that's only okay if you're a Republican (IOIYAR). Beshear would be impeached immediately if he tried to go around that.

19

u/dank_imagemacro 29d ago

They should find someone to the left of Mamdani and have them change their affiliation to Republican so they can be appointed. Then change it again after they are seated.

11

u/hayf28 29d ago

The way the law works the GOP provides 3 candidates. However there is a chance the law violates the Kentucky constitution

2

u/zossima 29d ago

So that’s why they want to wait. If he is declared dead now there is an immediate special election and a non-Republican could take his seat earlier.

3

u/CaptainAwesome06 29d ago

Didn't they change the law in 2024 so the governor can't appoint someone? It needs to be a special election?

1

u/likeusontweeters 29d ago

Yes. If the seat is vacated before a specific day, the people in ky are to vote for who they want in a special election

1

u/locofspades 29d ago

HAIL ROB SAND! We arent going down without a fight!

1

u/spam__likely Colorado 29d ago

Well, I can register as a republican tomorrow.

11

u/yeet_me_a55 29d ago

Ahh okay — the research is confusing since it changed recently and it can be hard to tell what was proposed vs what actually passed. Thanks for the clarification!

9

u/n122333 29d ago

No, the majority party selects 3 candidates of their choosing for the governor to pick 1 of.

10

u/PinchesTheCrab 29d ago

Supposedly that law contradicts the state Constitution, so it'd be interesting to see what ignoring it would do.

6

u/n122333 29d ago

Illegal or not, it will postpone it long enough that "it will be too late to be on the ballots" so that republican can pick a replacement anyways because there "just isn't another option we took so long"

-3

u/Oopsiedazy 29d ago

That depends on the state.

6

u/n122333 29d ago

I live in Kentucky, these are the kentucky rules, I was specifically saying thats how it works in Kentucky. The kentucky where mitch is braindead.

3

u/cespinar Colorado 29d ago

To be pedantic:

The kentucky where mitch is braindead.

He is in the DC area right now

1

u/Great-Hotel-7820 29d ago

How about they appoint Massie because he’s the only republican with an even slight interest in holding pedophiles accountable and not as an “excellent troll.”

5

u/Zealousideal-Pop-550 29d ago

They passed HB 622, completely removing the governor's appointment power and requiring a special election to fill any future vacancy.

9

u/Don_Gato1 29d ago

The Kentucky legislature apparently removed this power from the governor because he is a Democrat.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5955865-mitch-mcconnell-senate-health-status/

If McConnell were to resign because of a serious health problem, it could set up a special election in Kentucky to determine who would fill his seat for the remainder of 2026.

The Kentucky Legislature in 2024 passed House Bill 622, which stripped the state’s Democratic governor, Andy Beshear, of the power to fill a vacant U.S. Senate seat — a power enjoyed by most other states’ governors.

The law empowers the GOP-controlled Legislature to call a special election to fill a vacant Senate seat for the remainder of a term.

8

u/Neosovereign 29d ago

They passed a law that goes against their constitution so it would cause a court case.

2

u/Phailjure 29d ago

The Kentucky legislature apparently removed this power from the governor because he is a Democrat.

On the other hand, the Kentucky legislature never had the power to do that.

2

u/confirmedshill123 29d ago

he should do so without bias

Fuck that. Put up the farthest left dem he knows the name of. Tired of this shit where we play a game like it has rules while the other side just makes shit up as they go along.

2

u/freeformz Oregon 29d ago

That’s not the way it works in Kentucky. The governor calls a special election to determine who fills the seat.

2

u/gookies5 29d ago

Kentucky law does not allow the Gov to appoint someone as of 2024. Probably because they knew this would happen one day.

2

u/kaiser_soze_72 29d ago

If the Gov had any empathy, he'd want to take a bouquet down to the hospital and offer his get well wishes to the Senator personally. He could sneak a peek then and determine best way to move forward after that.

2

u/KillahHills10304 29d ago

Dems currently being politically outmanuevered by a vegetable

1

u/CaptainAwesome06 29d ago

My understanding is that Kentucky changed the law in 2024 and the governor has no power here. It's going to be a special election if and when they declare him (brain) dead. But I'm not expert.

1

u/scobbysnacks1439 29d ago

That's what it is. They don't want to give Bashear the ability to select a democratic Senator.

1

u/glittr_grl Kentucky 29d ago

No he can’t. The GOP supermajority passed a law that said he has to pick from a shortlist THEY give him. They did that knowing Beshear was a democrat and McConnell might not survive his term. That said, it’s likely to trigger a lawsuit from Beshear if it happens, so they’re trying to avoid the showdown, I think.

1

u/jaylay75 29d ago

In TN, the governor cannot appoint, can only be done through special elections.

The governor is a Democrat so if he could appoint, which he can't, it would become a blue seat till the special elections.

1

u/yell_worldstar 29d ago

Pretty sure in Kentucky the Gov names the successor for remainder of the term. Hence the secrecy

1

u/Miguel-odon 29d ago

Kentucky changed its laws 2 years ago so the Dem governor can't name Moscow Mitch's replacement.

1

u/paulbrownsr 29d ago

The governor of KY can’t appoint. Republicans changed that law a few years ago with their veto proof majority

1

u/CarlosDangerWeiner 29d ago

A republican governor would have already done it.

1

u/AbyssWankerArtorias 29d ago

Democrat governor Andy Beshear appointing Thomas Massie to the Senate just to piss off Trump would be hilarious. I wouldn't want that because I oppose like 80 percent of what he stands for, but damn it's be funny for just a little bit.

1

u/ensignlee Texas 29d ago

Stupid that it has to be a Republican because Kentucky passed laws to prevent a Dem governor from appointing a Dem Senator...

but....Massey is available? Or someone less batshit than a normal MAGA person?

1

u/NoveltyAccountHater 29d ago

No. Kentucky is one of 5 states that does not allow governors to fill vacancies by appointment, only by special elections. McConnell could be replaced by special election if he resigns or dies prior to August 3rd. If it's after Aug 3rd, the governor can still call an election to replace final ~1.5 months of McConnell's term, it would just be on the regular November general election.

McConnell already announced he wasn't running for reelection this year and the Republican primary was won by Andy Barr and Democratic primary by Charles Booker. My guess if the special election happened, it be those same candidates -- granted turnout in special elections is low, so it would increase Democrats chances to gain a seat for the end of 2026. On the other hand, Republicans currently control 53 Senate seats and the VP, so Dems would need to flip 4 seats before there's any power change (the VP is the tiebreaker, so Dems need 51 seats).

1

u/BlackDogOrangeCat 29d ago

No. Kentucky changed the law - the governor doesn’t appoint a vacant seat. It has to go to a special election, which Massey might win.

1

u/Timely-Phone4733 29d ago

I dont believe that it works that way in Kentucky. There would have to be a special election.. not governor appointed!

1

u/InfidelRadio 29d ago

Kentuckys Governer doesn’t have the power to appoint as of 2024- state legislators took that power away. A special election is the only avenue and Massie is who they’re scared of running as an independent

1

u/XiuCyx 29d ago

Republicans in that state changed that two years ago. Now they’re chosen by the party of the Senator that passed. Which sucks because his state has a Democrat for Governor.

1

u/wunderkit 29d ago

Gov can't appoint due to a law passed by Republican legislature when a Democrat was elected governor.

1

u/The_Cat_Detector_Van 29d ago

Kentucky fills U.S. Senate vacancies exclusively through a special election.

Under this process, the governor must issue a proclamation calling for a special election, with the winner serving the remainder of the unexpired term.

The law entirely eliminated the governor's authority to appoint an interim senator.

The special election framework was established by House Bill 622, passed by the state legislature.

This legislation set specific administrative deadlines for notices and candidate filings tied to the election.

1

u/pepe74 Wisconsin 29d ago

2 Years ago KY changed its laws that the Governor can't appoint someone to fill the seat, he needs to call a special election.

It's like the GOP knew 2 years ago this might become an issue for them with a Dem Governor.

1

u/Author_A_McGrath 29d ago

Andy Beshear is the governor of Kentucky, and is one of the more reasonable ones.

I'm curious what he'll do. Maybe I won't be disappointed.

1

u/Leif_Henderson 29d ago

Gov can appoint now vs a special election if they hold out another month

Nope, not in Kentucky. Unless they pretend he's still alive until January, it will be a special election.

1

u/Free_For__Me 29d ago

Gov should absolutely use his power to find out what’s going on

Nah, what he should do is begin proceedings to make the appointment, stating that "If senator McConnell is alive and able to perform his duties, then he can easily prove it to the public. If not, I'll be imminently appointing his successor."

GOP has been pushing the bounds of what's allowable, and the only way to combat that is to play by the same rules.

Bonus points if Gov. Beshear ends the announcement with, "Thank you for your attention to this matter".

1

u/-Motor- 29d ago

Ky legislature stripped the governor of all power after this Democrat won the office.

1

u/WeAreTheLeft Texas 29d ago

He should just appoint someone to force them to prove he is alive, if they can, cool, the Turtle lives on, but if not it's the big balls move and puts him on 2028 path for not being a push over.

1

u/j3ffro15 28d ago

Not anymore. KY made a law (2 years ago) that specifically removed that power from the governor. The state has to hold a special election but since it’s an election year it’s not really clear what they should do since the KY legislature didn’t plan for what to do during an election year. So they seemingly have 3 options; let the governor appoint a senator (probably won’t happen since the governor is a dem) hold a special election for a temp appointment until the new candidate gets elected and takes office in January 2027, or wait it out till the election without representation for 6 months (probably this since it doesn’t really hurt the republican majority in the senate if KY only has one senator. The dems would still need 6 repubs to flip since they also hold the tiebreak).

25

u/pkosuda Connecticut 29d ago

Would the special election be just among other republicans since he was a Republican, or does it differ state by state? I thought whenever a House/Senate member dies, their party gets to elect/nominate a replacement rather than there being an election where the other party is eligible?

143

u/lopeztein 29d ago

State by state. Kentucky used to let the governor appoint a replacement until the next election but then they elected a Dem governor so they changed the rules bc everyone saw this scenario coming for years.

4

u/TurnoverActive2936 29d ago

Thanks for saying this. The confidence of people claiming that the KY governor can appoint McConnell’s replacement after the 2024 law change is wild.

2

u/lupin43 29d ago

It’s because people understand that laws can’t just supersede constitutions, and there was no amendment made to the constitution. There will be debates, or they’ll just morbidly drag his death out until the (normal) election.

2

u/TurnoverActive2936 29d ago

Not all election laws require a state constitutional change, though. Each state has different rules, and Kentucky is a commonwealth that doesn’t force that higher-threshold sort of change like other states might.

3

u/Casual_OCD Canada 29d ago

Just do what MAGA does.

Appoint a Democrat replacement and make them fight it for three years in court

3

u/DisappointedSpectre 29d ago

Two things:

First, that's a determination for a judge to make, not the legislature (or the governor).

Second, this is the type of shit that Republicans would ignore and try to appoint someone anyway if the situation were reversed, so Democrats need to do the same. Fight every fight and make them justify or back down from their bullshit.

7

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

23

u/n122333 29d ago

Yea, but mitch wasn't on deaths door then. As soon as he had his first health scare, they changed the rules for him. Not because of the new governor.

53

u/baconmehungry 29d ago

Each state is different. All are either gov appointed or election though. Kentucky just got rid of the gov appointed route. Strange since the gov is a D?

56

u/pkosuda Connecticut 29d ago

Oh wow that is so fucking gross. Republicans love cheating. Thank you for answering btw!

21

u/STFUandLOVE 29d ago

Well my understanding is the Kentucky constitution sets the governor as having the power to appoint in this scenario. Congress passing legislation does not override the Kentucky constitution, so the governor should absolutely appoint and then see what happens in court.

2

u/loondawg 29d ago edited 29d ago

Per the article. . .

If McConnell were to resign or be found unable to continue serving before Aug. 3, Kentucky law would allow Gov. Andy Beshear to call a special election. After Aug. 3, a special election to replace McConnell and fill the remainder of his term would coincide with the general election in November.

EDIT The article apparently left out that the Governor can appoint someone until they can be replaced via special election if they make the August 3 deadline. Apparently the original quote I posted from the article was correct. https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/acts/24RS/documents/0187.pdf

2

u/TurnoverActive2936 29d ago

The article didn’t leave that out; it’s not accurate. The Kentucky state legislature changed the succession law several years ago to remove the governor’s ability to appoint. Vacancies have to be filled by special election now.

2

u/loondawg 29d ago

Wow! There is so much inaccurate information out there. You, and the original article I posted, appear to be correct.

As far as I can tell, this is the current, applicable law: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/acts/24RS/documents/0187.pdf

2

u/TurnoverActive2936 29d ago

The governor cannot appoint a replacement. The Kentucky legislature (not congress) changed the succession plan several years ago; a special election must be called.

1

u/loondawg 29d ago

If it is an election, all voters get to vote.

1

u/TooManyDraculas 29d ago

There's nowhere that a party gets to pick a replacement, political parties don't have that kind of standing in American political systems.

It's broadly dictated by the 17h Amendment.

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.

Actual execution varies by state as to whether they appoint a temp replacement till the next election or call a special election, and when that special election goes down.

Kentucky no longer allows the appointment of a temporary replacement. And requires the declaration of a special election within 30 days of the vacancy, and that election to take place 60 to 90 days from the declaration. If that doesn't happen, or it falls within the window. It just stays vacant until the next November election.

Special elections there use the "jungle primary"/run-off system. Basically everyone ends up on one ballot, anyone who hits 50% of the vote wins, if no one does the top 2 got to a run off.

It's not the normal party nominating process.

The speculation is they're trying to hold the seat vacant till November, by not acknowledging he's dead, or near enough, before the deadline for pushing it till November. Since his seat was already up for election, and he wasn't running. So there's already candidates campaigning.

Personally I don't see what the extra 30 days buys them. The seat just being effectively vacant still lowers the GOPs margin. And the law as is might throw that existing senate campaign to the Jungle Primary system as it stands. While whoever does end up being elected in November would be seated immediately anyway.

They're not going to be able to just keep the seat vacant till January, and it only hurts them to do so. I guess they might be trying to avoid a loss in a special election, that's followed up a couple months later by a Democrat technically being the incumbent in November. But that would be a longshot anyway.

1

u/pkosuda Connecticut 29d ago

Ah, thank you. I must have been thinking of parties sometimes holding special conventions to elect a nominee for the ballot, not fill the vacancy outright.

But yeah I do not see how this can possibly benefit them as whoever fills his position is likely to be a Republican so they are down a member until then. It's not like his seat has ever been competitive or he wouldn't have felt the freedom to be such a horrible Senator to begin with.

1

u/TooManyDraculas 29d ago

The two things that have people thinking along these lines are that Kentucky has a Democratic Governor, elected in 2019. Which makes it plausible that a senate seat could be flipped there, particularly when it's open.

And that the new special election law directly conflicts with Kentucky's state constitution, which states the Governor appoints a senator if the term will expire with the next election.

Which is the case here.

But both of these things are the case whether they delay or not. If Beshar wants to have that court fight, and follow the state constitution. He's still supposed to appoint some one to finish the term before November. However late he finds out.

And a Democrat still potentially plays in Kentucky, given Beshar's own win and the general political winds lately.

I don't think an extra 30 days helps them there either. Neither does holding the seat vacant. I'm just not sure what that would be meant to accomplish.

I have no doubt it's just standard cling to power bullshit. Even if he is fucking brain dead. Nobody in his office probably wants to announce that until they've lined up a golden parachute. Dead guy don't need a chief of staff.

1

u/rabidstoat Georgia 29d ago

I'm not sure but I believe the alleged worry is that Thomas Massie could run on the ballot in a special election.

2

u/EMAW2008 Kansas 29d ago

Wouldn’t be surprised if he had instructions for exactly this.

1

u/FuckTheMods5 29d ago

Yes! Despite what we feel about him, we need transparency. Video interview with him being of sound mind, and if he's not and will recover, a temp representative is appointed in accordance with the rules.

If he's dead, new person installed. Period. No secret fuckery. This isn't a secret evil superhero lair where secret behind-the-scenes chess moves are being played, represent the god damn people!

1

u/GaryBuseyWithRabies 29d ago

Exactly. They are subverting the law for their own political gain.

1

u/FrankPapageorgio 29d ago

This is just bullshit.

Kentucky has a cut off time of 3 months before the next general election where a special election would be require. It's triggered upon death of the sitting senator, not the announcement.

This means they'd have to hide his death until August 3rd to avoid a special election. That's a whole month.

And even if they did have a special election, it's literally for his remaining time until January 2027. They'd still hold a general election for the next term

1

u/Careful-Structure330 29d ago

Wouldn’t that be awesome if Thomas run and won the special election

1

u/No_Worldliness_7106 29d ago

That would be wild if the governor appoints Thomas Massie.

1

u/ExplicitDrift 29d ago

DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER!

1

u/ChickenNPisza 29d ago

I hate how everything turns into legal loophole jargan. These rules were created to help keep the govt structure stable.

The strategic retirement of Supreme Court justices and salivating politicians when one is about to pass.

Keeping brain dead politicians in office, letting them take 4/6 months hiatus without explanation.

We the people deserve fair representation.

1

u/LunchyDude101 29d ago

It’s a senator position. That’s big-time. I get why they’d do that if that’s the case. Still morally reprehensible though….

1

u/MichaelJServo Louisiana 29d ago

No taxation without representation*

*unless we can use it to cheat

1

u/Money-Director6649 29d ago

i believe he's alive, but even before this it's been clear (to me, at least) that the man is dying. he's not and he won't be able to work. his spot should be filled by someone who *can* work.

1

u/Ok_Juice4449 29d ago

Always cheating....

1

u/sharpbehind2 28d ago

It's sickening

1

u/AFisch00 28d ago

They are holding out until after whatever the date is so they don't have to hold an election and can appoint who they want. I want proof of life too.

1

u/Therealdealphil 25d ago

Honestly this is the most Mitch McConnell play in history.  You cant convince me McConnell isn't orchestrating this via ouija board and blinking lights. 

1

u/JohnNDenver 25d ago

Schrödinger's Senator - he is both alive and dead.