Kennedyfs Death Raises Issues of Succession

By ABBY GOODNOUGH and SARAH WHEATON
Published: August 26, 2009, New York Times

The death of Edward M. Kennedy immediately raises the question of who will succeed the senator — and how quickly — as Congress is embroiled in a bitter battle over plans to overhaul the nationfs health care system.

One of Senator Kennedyfs last public acts before he died late Tuesday was an emotional plea to Massachusetts state lawmakers that they replace him quickly upon his death. His note was viewed as an acknowledgment that his absence would leave uncertain not only the identity of his replacement, but also the essence and fate of health care reform, his most cherished legislative goal.

In the letter, dated July 2, Mr. Kennedy asked lawmakers to amend the statefs rules and grant the governor the power to appoint his successor until a special election could be held.

gIt is vital for this Commonwealth to have two voices speaking for the needs of its citizens and two votes in the Senate during the approximately five months between a vacancy and a special election,h he wrote.

While Massachusetts voters would probably elect another Democratic senator, current state law does not allow a special election until at least 145 days after a vacancy occurs – in this case, mid-January. That delay could hinder the partyfs efforts to corral the 60 votes needed in the United States Senate to move health care legislation forward.

It remains unclear whether the state legislature will grant Mr. Kennedyfs wish but on Wednesday, Gov. Deval Patrick signaled that he was in favor.

hI believe that the senatorfs request to permit the governor to appoint someone to serve for the five months between now and that special election is eminently reasonable,h Mr. Patrick said in an interview with WBZ News Radio, gand I think especially timely when you consider the momentous proposals in front of the Congress right now around health care reform and climate change and so forth. Massachusetts needs two voices in the United States Senate.h

Legislative leaders have not publicly commented on Mr. Kennedyfs request, but reaction from other state lawmakers has been muted. The statefs Democrats are in the awkward position of being asked to reverse their own 2004 vote to keep vacant Senate seats empty until a special election.

Until that year, Massachusetts law had called for the governor to appoint a temporary replacement if a Senate seat became vacant. But when Senator John Kerry, a Democrat, was running for president in 2004, the Democrat-controlled State Legislature wanted to deny the governor at the time — Mitt Romney, a Republican — the power to name a successor if Mr. Kerry won. The resulting law requires a special election within 145 to 160 days after the vacancy occurs.

In the letter discussing his successor, Mr. Kennedy said any temporary appointee should offer an gexplicit, personal commitmenth not to run for the seat in the special election.

The State Legislature is not set to return until after Labor Day, but Mr. Kennedyfs death could increase momentum for changing the law.

gI have a pretty strong feeling that they will do it,h said Philip W. Johnston, the former head of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, who remains involved in state politics. gThe Republicans will say, eIsnft this terrible,f but the Democrats have nothing to apologize for as long as the temporary appointee is not a candidate for the permanent seat.h

Mr. Johnston said the looming Congressional vote on health care was undoubtedly the driving force behind Mr. Kennedyfs request.

gThe tragedy of his death would be compounded,h Mr. Johnston said, gif the loss of his vote were to result in the defeat of health reform.h

In the United States Senate, Mr. Kennedyfs absence had been felt for months before his death as he underwent treatment for a malignant brain tumor at his home in Cape Cod. As deliberations began on a major health overhaul effort — an issue Mr. Kennedy called gthe cause of my lifeh — he had to hand off day-to-day oversight of the health committee to a close friend, Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut.

Despite his reputation as an unapologetic liberal, Mr. Kennedy was known inside the Senate as a master of negotiation, and senators were divided over whether the ultimate bill would be more — or less — bipartisan if he had been around to shepherd it through. Mr. Dodd, who moved a version out of the Health Committee, said he stayed true to Mr. Kennedyfs convictions.

Others disagree.

gIt is a very one-sided, very liberal bill,h said Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah. gI know that Ted would not have done that had he been able to be here.h

Because of their struggles pushing the health care overhaul forward, Democrats have increasingly been considering using a process called greconciliationh to advance the legislation with just a simple majority, rather than 60 votes. With Mr. Kennedy gone and Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia also in poor health, such a maneuver seems even more likely.

Several people, inside the family and beyond, have been discussed as possible candidates to take Mr. Kennedyfs place in the Senate.

gHis wife, confidant and policy adviser, Victoria Reggie Kennedy, has been subject of speculation as a possible successor, though family friends have said she is not interested.

Other family members seen as possible heirs include his nephew, former Representative Joseph P. Kennedy II. He has expressed reluctance to return to politics, but he has $2 million in leftover campaign funds and has not ruled out a run..

Outside the family, there is a stable of high-profile Massachusetts Democrats considered possible successors, including Representatives Stephen F. Lynch and Michael E. Capuano; state Attorney General Martha Coakley; and former Representative Martin Meehan, who retired in 2007 to become chancellor of the University of Massachusetts-Lowell, but who has about $4.8 million in campaign cash left.