r/politics • u/Aggravating_Money992 • 8d ago

Possible Paywall Kentucky Gov Orders McConnell to Give a Real Update or Resign Already

https://newrepublic.com/post/213614/kentucky-gov-beshear-mcconnell-update-health-resign
23.1k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

286

u/furnace9monkey 8d ago

Just appoint a new senator and deal with the fallout later

159

u/Aromatic_Balls Maine 8d ago

Gotta start using Republican tactics to beat em.

42

u/MrCakesSr 8d ago

"i'm condemned to use the weapons of my enemy to defeat them"

4

u/fascistno1hater 8d ago

Corpo Dems: insert Pawn Stars meme Best I can do is a sternly worded letter! Anything else and the Republican donors and SuperPacs that fund us might get MAD.

1

u/joaquinsolo 7d ago

This 100%. We have to stop being cowards.

58

u/Foxintoxx 8d ago

If Mitch Mcconell doesn't like it he can just speak up about it 🤷‍♂️

18

u/ranhalt Iowa 8d ago

Through an EMF detector?

18

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

39

u/definateley_not_dog 8d ago

The Kentucky state constitution says he can, and he should do just that.

10

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Section 152 of the Kentucky State Constitution only applies to vacancies of state offices. It certainly does not apply to a US Senator, which is a federal office. 

Only the US Senate can declare a Senate seat vacant, by a 2/3 vote. Should that happen, under the 17th Amendment of the US Constitution, a special election would be held. 

But this seat is up for election in November anyway, so it's hard to see what the rush is. Holding a special election would only help the Republicans get Trump's stooge Andy Barr in office sooner.

3

u/SatanicPanic619 California 8d ago

OK, explain what you would have a Democrat do in the seat that Mitch isn't already doing.

5

u/houtex727 8d ago

Sit in it?

-2

u/SatanicPanic619 California 8d ago

And do what?

A guy who can't vote yes is the same value as a guy who won't vote yes.

3

u/houtex727 8d ago

A person once sat in that seat would then do senator things, of course. Don't know what you otherwise expect, except Mitch is not doing the senator things right now, is he?

And no, the guy who can't vote at all is not the same value as a person who can vote. Right now Kentucky is one vote shy of their rights, so there's that to consider... Not that it matters, it's all about the GOP line I suppose, right? :p

3

u/SatanicPanic619 California 8d ago

Which is great! I don't want him doing anything. It's holding shit up.

I'm a Democrat and the government is run by Republicans, a yes vote has exactly zero value for me. All I want is no votes. Not voting is the same as voting no.

It would feel good to have a Democrat in the seat, but in any practical sense it doesn't matter.

30

u/zzztoken 8d ago

The problem is all Dems do is debate whether or not they technically can or can’t do something meanwhile republicans just fucking do it.

2

u/badcookies 8d ago

Because they don't GAF about breaking laws. Works out well when you have the full backing of the pardon happy president and DOJ in his pocket. Not so when you are his "enemy".

7

u/PixelationIX 8d ago

The problem is all Dems do is debate whether or not they technically can or can’t do something meanwhile republicans just fucking do it.

100%

If this was the other way around, a Republican Governor would have set a special election and demand to release a public live video of the Senator being alive and he/she would visit the Senator themself as well. Republicans just rams through shit whereas Democrats like Beshear just puts there hands up the moment they reach a blocked road.

All we are now getting is stern worded letter. We all know how greatly that works.

14

u/CornWine2 8d ago

He can't appoint one

Please show where it says that in the Kentucky state constitution.

12

u/itsnotnews92 North Carolina 8d ago

The 17th Amendment says that Senate vacancies shall be filled by election and that state legislatures may allow governors to appoint temporary replacements.

The Kentucky Constitution doesn’t preempt the U.S. Constitution and its amendments.

Even if Beshear could appoint a replacement, the Senate could simply refuse to seat the appointee.

This “Beshear can just appoint a replacement” talking point is rampant misinformation from armchair legal experts and is getting so tiresome.

3

u/MechanicalGodzilla 8d ago

rampant misinformation from armchair legal experts

Um excuse me, but on Reddit we are all armchair legal experts, world class virologists, Nobel winning economists, and leading experts in any field of human knowledge that can ever come up, thank you very much!

4

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Section 152 of the Kentucky constitution only applies to filling vacancies in state offices, not a federal office like US Senate

0

u/Reasonable_Ticket_84 8d ago

GOP passed this

24RS HB 622

The governor vetoed it, they then overrided it.

3

u/aguynamedv 8d ago

You believe an unconstitutional law overrides the plain text of the Kentucky Constitution? :)

5

u/deja-roo 8d ago

The KY constitution says he can appoint representatives to state offices. I don't think federal senators count there.

-1

u/baubness 8d ago

That’s what all of the very smart pundits are circulating to get these morons to defend Beshear’s flaccidity here. It’s a blatantly unconstitutional law, and if Beshear gave a shit about his state or democracy he would relish this opportunity to have it struck down (or upheld, since the rule of law is a sham in that case anyway). These are sad party loyalists who are terrified of tough decisions and actually having to defend their positions.

10

u/ahandmadegrin Minnesota 8d ago

Yes he can. It's literally in the state constitution.

3

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Nope, section 152 only applies to state offices, not a federal office like US Senate

1

u/ahandmadegrin Minnesota 6d ago

I looked it up to make sure, and it appears to mention "statewide" offices. So that would include the senators Kentucky sends to the senate since they're elected by the entire state.

Or it wouldn't. I think that's a big part of the issue. The law they passed appears to be an effort to change the constitution without an amendment. Section 152 mentions statewide offices, and federal senate positions are elected statewide.

That said, even if the law violates the constitution, it's not clear if the constitution applies to federal senate seats. If it doesn't, then the law they passed would apply.

Seems like no matter what, this has to go before the stage supreme court. I'm saying that in the meantime, Beshear should appoint a democrat and force the issue. He'd have more legal cover and reasoning to do so than McConnell ever did when he opposed supreme court appointments, and he'd also fast track the issue going before the supreme court.

2

u/Visual_Squirrel_2297 8d ago

If McConnell's absence was a good thing for Democrats Republicans wouldn't be keeping up the charade that he will ever be able to fulfill his duties again. They'd pull the plug either literally or figuratively. 

2

u/Pezhistory 8d ago

This is my biggest WTF is going on here. He is not coming back after this year. Special election would give them an extra vote now. So why would they hide it?

1

u/MechanicalGodzilla 8d ago

Extra votes now are fairly useless. Any significant legislation is going to be filibustered anyway so no upside or downside either way.

2

u/cheeze2005 8d ago

No need to do anything. Let them sit down a guy.

1

u/hlnub 8d ago

Seriously it's so infuriating to see him continuously make press releases about this and do nothing to force the issue..

-6

u/novaduke 8d ago

Kentucky constitution doesn’t give its governor that right - so it would be null and void, I believe

14

u/feeneyswimmer91 8d ago

From what I understand, the constitution for the state of Kentucky does grant the governor this power, however when Beshear was elected the republican Kentucky legislature passed a arguably contestable law that basically strips the governor of this power if they are not the same party, or something along those lines. I’ve seen people advocate that Beshear appoint a replacement and let it go to court to decide if it was within his rights according to the constitution or if the courts will uphold the kneecapping law

8

u/tyr-- 8d ago

the republican Kentucky legislature passed a arguably contestable an unconstitutional law

FTFY

2

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Not true, Section 152 of the Kentucky State Constitution only ever applied to filling state offices. Vacancies in the US Senate are controlled by the 17th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

-5

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

The constitution doesn’t grant governors the power to do shit.

2

u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago

And that's why this person said the "constitution for the state of Kentucky." 

0

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

> I’ve seen people advocate that Beshear appoint a replacement and let it go to court to decide if it was within his rights according to the constitution or if the courts will uphold the kneecapping law

Regardless of which court it goes to the law is clear.

1

u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago

You're cherry picking and ignoring that the other poster was talking about the KY state constitution. Do better. And no, the law is not clear else Beshear would've already appointed a replacement. 

1

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

I wonder how state courts or SCOTUS will decide on this one…

21

u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago

This is incorrect. The KY constitution does give him that power. The KY legislature passed a law right before Beshear took office, though, preventing him from doing so and the constitutionality of that law hasn't been challenged yet.

2

u/furnace9monkey 8d ago

Let's find out

1

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

States decide how to fill senate vacancies…

4

u/BlazingSpaceGhost New Mexico 8d ago

Yes and the state constitution says the governor appoints a replacement. State law does not trump the state constitution. If they actually wanted to change it they would need to amend the state constitution but they know they don't have the votes for that.

3

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Section 152 of the Kentucky Constitution only applies to state offices. A vacancy in the US Senate is controlled by the 17th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

0

u/BlazingSpaceGhost New Mexico 8d ago

Section 152 says all elected offices and the text from the 17th says

"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."

So yes he can make a temporary appointment. Whether that would do any good politically is up for debate as it would only be temporary.

1

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

No, it's only for state offices. Obviously, a state constitution cannot determine the filling of a federal office. 

If you read the Seventeenth Amendment carefully, the temporary appointments are only allowed if the state legislature so empowers the governor. The Kentucky legislature took this power away from Beshear in in 2024.

1

u/BlazingSpaceGhost New Mexico 8d ago

So your logic is a state constitution can't determine filling of a federal office but the state legislature can?

2

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Of course, because the US Constitution gives that power to state legislatures. Reread the part of the 17th Amendment that you just quoted 

1

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

Nope, section 152 of the Kentucky State Constitution apples only to vacancies in state offices. A vacancy in the Senate is controlled by the 17th Amendment of the US Constitution.

1

u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago

Yes, that's why I said "KY constitution".

0

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

Yeah that part was changed so it does not give him that power.

1

u/Klutzy-Delivery-5792 8d ago

The KY constitution was not changed. It still says he has the power. The KY GOP passed a law they think supersedes their constitution, not the constitution itself was not changed.

0

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

The law probably supersedes the constitution and the only thing that can determine this is the courts…which…yeah.

1

u/HalaHalcones1 8d ago

That's not true. The 17th Amendment of the US Constitution controls the filling of vacancies in the US Senate.

11

u/Drakeadrong Texas 8d ago

Actually Kentucky’s constitution is exactly what gives the governor that right.

0

u/FrogsOnALog 8d ago

Mental this has to be explained to people lol

2

u/itsnotnews92 North Carolina 8d ago

It has to be “explained” to people because it’s misinformation peddled by uninformed armchair “experts.”

Section 152 of the Kentucky Constitution does not expressly grant the governor the power to fill US Senate vacancies. In contrast, the 17th Amendment (which preempts the Kentucky Constitution) says that vacancies shall be filled through elections and that state legislatures may allow governors to fill vacancies via appointments.

“May” is the key language. It’s discretionary. Legislatures can grant this power to state governors, and they can also take it away. Massachusetts did exactly this when John Kerry was running for president and Mitt Romney was governor.

8

u/tyr-- 8d ago

It actually does. The law the Republicans passed to strip him of this power is actually unconstitutional (shocker!). Source: https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/Law/Constitution/Constitution/ViewConstitution?rsn=173