Senators should be selected by special election

Several recent Senate vacancies caused by the incoming Obama administration have shown the relative ineffectiveness of state governors appointing their replacements. There is the now infamous example of the Illinois governor accepting bribes for his appointment powers to replace President Barack Obama's Senate seat. New York Gov. David Patterson, having to replace Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, spent weeks giving the impression he would appoint Caroline Kennedy, who would have been nearly the worse choice for Senator possible, before settling on Rep. Kristin Gillbrand.

Vice President Joseph Biden said he wanted his son to take his Senate seat. But his son is serving in the Delaware National Guard, making himself currently ineligible. For now, the Delaware governor appointed someone who will not run for reelection so that Biden's son can run for the seat in two years.

Even in Colorado the ineffectiveness of governor appointments is seen. Sen. Ken Salazar took a position as Obama's Secretary of the Interior, leading to the need for Gov. Ritter to appoint a replacement. Instead of picking someone with the experience to be Senator, Ritter apparently wanted to show how different he was by appointing the Denver schools chief.

These are examples from just this year at how the process of governors picking Senate candidate replacements is far from ideal. Americans apparently don't think so either. Less than half of all people appointed to fill Senate vacancies win reelection. There are countless examples of governors using their appointment powers not in the best interests of their state, but rather in the best interests of their own families or special interests. What is needed is a better way of replacing Senators.

Sen. Russ Feingold announced that he plans to introduce a Constitutional amendment to address these concerns. His amendment would change the U.S. Constitution to have all Senate vacancies be filled by special election rather than governor appointment. This would give Americans, rather than the governors and their special interests, a choice in their Senate replacements.

Although there certainly are criticisms that forcing special elections would cost the states money in order to set them up, this price is well worth the benefit of having a better functioning government in regards to Senate vacancies. Although Constitutional Amendments are difficult to pass, requiring first a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate followed by approval by at least three-quarters of the states, this proposed amendment is something that could gain broad approval and is a good idea for this country. Hopefully, Sen. Feingold's proposed amendment attracts the attention of Congress. It would be a great step toward fixing the current inefficiencies of allowing governor appointments to Senate vacancies.

- Aanston Frazier, a former Marine Corps intelligence analyst, is a senior economics and political science major and a Mirror columnist.