Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

I challenge the Mass. GOP “cry-baby hypocrites” to seek a referendum on the Senate appointment law

By

Let’s first be clear on one thing: contrary to the nonsense in the MA GOP lawsuit, there is plenty of time to initiate a referendum on whether the Governor should have been given the power to appoint an interim Senator.  All they have to do is gather a bunch of signatures within 90 days of when the law was signed.  At that point, a yes-or-no question will be placed on the 2010 ballot, and the people can decide.

Of course, the referendum wouldn’t affect the Kirk appointment.  But that’s OK — if they feel so strongly that this is a bad idea, they should want to repeal it regardless.

But they won’t do it.  Because they think that (a) John Kerry has a decent shot at an Obama cabinet post somewhere down the line; and (b) Charlie Baker has a decent shot at becoming Governor.  Which means that there might be an opportunity for the next Governor to make an interim Senate appointment.  And, while the GOP didn’t want Governor Patrick to have that power, they sure would want a Governor Baker to have it.

So don’t listen when the MA GOP pisses and moans about how everyone’s all partisan and stuff.  They are the “cry-baby hypocrites” here — and I am quoting one of their own in saying so.

I dare them to prove me wrong by mounting a signature drive to get a referendum on the ballot.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. GOP members in both Houses put amendments for this to take effect after this particular vacancy.  So there is no hypocrisy. In 2006 the GOP put legislation worded almost exactly as this legislation is to take effect after the 2006 mid-term elections. Again the Democrats were no where to be found.  So actually David, initiating a referendum that would be voted on at the next election in 2010 would be hypocritical because by that time we would be operating under a law that those in the GOP supported, in 2004, in 2006, and in 2009.

    <

    p>The only hypocrites here are the members of your party.  It’s pretty simple and plain to see.  

    • to untangle yourself after that statement.

      <

      p>

      GOP members in both Houses put amendments for this to take effect after this particular vacancy.  So there is no hypocrisy.

      <

      p>Pssst.  I think that’s where the hypocrisy begins.

    •  Began when democrats didn’t want to appoint an interim senator in 2004. Now, all of a sudden, the sky is falling, emergengy, we need a senator! It will amaze me if the vote is not delayed until next year. You just don’t have the votes.  

  2. I absolutely love the GOP chairlady’s calling this political. Her non-partisan solution is for voters to elect more Republicans. What could be more impartial than than?

  3. This whole thing reminded me of watching two drunks sitting in a bar accusing one another of being drunk. Both sides were politically motivated, and I don’t really blame either side.  

  5. …but format it as a Constitutional amendment.  (In other words start from scratch as an initiative rather than worry about a referendum on this particular law.)  I’ve said before that we should decide what we want to do and constitutionalize it to remove the possibility and temptation to play politics in the future.

Archives