Are these SSP sources

James L. and Crisitunity by any chance?

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 14:59:42 PM CDT

I can't comment

on an ongoing end-run around the constitution.

Also, I can't recall remembering.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 15:39:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Probably :-) n/t

Inside, outside, leave me alone. Inside, outside, nowhere is home. Inside, outside, WHERE HAVE I BEEN!? Out of my brain on the 5:15!

---

by: Merlin @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:54:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Groan

I don't see how this is going to pass muster.

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 15:33:38 PM CDT

Some discussion

Here's some discussion at the Albany project. If I'm understanding correctly, the key point in Ward v. Curran is:

"If a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, with no provision of  law  for  filling  the same, if the office be elective, the governor shall appoint a person to execute the duties thereof until the vacancy shall be filled by an election."

However, there is discussion downthread of intervening modifications to the state Constitution that may have invalidated Ward v. Curran.

This afternoon, I got a robocall from Governor Paterson saying that he had appointed a new Lieutenant Governor and giving reasons for it (including a claim that he had no successor), but the call never finished, because every time I said something, the call started again from the beginning, and I hung up the third time that happened. Did any of you also get the robocall?

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 01:21:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Got The Robocall

I got the robocall. It didn't start over when I said how annoying it was.

While it was annoying for me, it may have been informative for others who don't pay as close attention (which I assume would be most people).

---

by: dsimon @ Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 09:08:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Can the governor appoint an LG

and then ask the courts to confirm him/her?

Or

Can he ask the courts to let him appoint one?

I did not find the answer to these questions since the idea was floated.

If he appoints Suozzi, Paterson could be the governor for 4 more years.

---

by: fai calif @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 15:41:55 PM CDT

Suozzi has ruled it out.

UPDATE: Suozzi spokeswoman Jennifer Kim called back to rule out Suozzi's possible appointment. "He's interested in being county executive and concentrating on his reelection this year," she said

. http://blog.timesunion.com/cap...

---

by: homerun @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 15:48:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

appoint one of the assholes from the state senate

preferably a republican.  solves the most significant problem doesn't it?

---

by: st paul sage @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 16:03:03 PM CDT

TX Gov

Perry has 9.3 million CoH to take on KBH... Wow this is going to be one hell of a blood bath.

---

by: admnok @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 16:19:11 PM CDT

Constitutional?

Here's what the NY AG's office said:

http://www.nydailynews.com/blo...

   "The State Constitution explicitly prescribes what occurs when there is a vacancy in the Office of Lieutenant Governor. In such circumstance, article 4, § 6 states that "the temporary president of the senate shall perform all the duties of the lieutenant-governor during such vacancy..."

   "Article 4, § 1 of the Constitution expressly provides that "the lieutenant-governor shall be chosen at the same time, and for the same term" as the Governor. The Legislature did not authorize a Governor to bypass this provision of the Constitution and fill a vacancy in the Office of Lieutenant Governor pursuant to Public Officers Law § 43."

   "That statute, which provides for Gubernatorial appointment to fill certain vacancies, applies only when there is "no provision of law for filling the same". With respect to the Lieutenant Governor, however, the Constitution leaves no gap concerning a vacancy in that office - article 4, § 6 expressly addresses that circumstance."

   "In sum, we understand the apparent political convenience of the proponents' theory due to the current Senate circumstances. In our view, however, it is not constitutional."

I haven't read the case law, but I'm not so sure the analysis is so clear on a textual level. The AG argues that article 4, § 6 addresses the circumstance of a Lt. Gov. vacancy. But it does not "fill" the vacancy; it says only that the Lt. Gov.'s "duties" go to the temporary president of the senate. Since there is no provision of law to actually fill the position, it would seem that the statute for appointing someone to the position could apply--if one can get around the Article 4, § 1 provision that the Lt. Gov. must be chosen at the same time as the Governor.

Perhaps one could interpret "chosen" as referring to elections? It would seem that the point of having the same time and "same terms" would be to allow the Lt. Gov. to fill the remaining time of a governor who left the office before the end of the term. Just thinkin'...

---

by: dsimon @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:38:40 PM CDT

reading that

I think he can pull it off honestly.....

the statute seems clear that he can fill any vacancy where there is no law for filling the seat....I agree with the reading that the senate president takes over the duties...but he's still the senate president, not the Lt. Governor...therefore, that seat can be filled.  

The only question now is whether or not article one blocks this move.  

Personally, I think this could be very helpful right now if we get to appoint one.  

Check out http://electioninspection.word... for the latest news, election results, poll analysis, and predictions

---

by: skywrnchsr509 @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:50:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree

This seems completely wrong to me:

With respect to the Lieutenant Governor, however, the Constitution leaves no gap concerning a vacancy in that office - article 4, § 6 expressly addresses that circumstance.

But art. 4, § 6 only says who fulfills the Lt. Gov.'s duties during a vacancy. It does not expressly address filling such a vacancy. I think Paterson might have a real shot here.

---

by: DavidNYC @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 19:20:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

One and a half years

That's how long New York has been with out a lt. Governor. Why??????

---

by: jmartin4s @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:51:45 PM CDT

Because of Paterson's ego I'm guessing n/t

Inside, outside, leave me alone. Inside, outside, nowhere is home. Inside, outside, WHERE HAVE I BEEN!? Out of my brain on the 5:15!

---

by: Merlin @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:56:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Because until now

there's wasn't need for one, and there's still a strong argument that it's not constitutional.

This isn't Patterson's fault.

---

by: wmlawman @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 17:57:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ah, ok

I get your drift. If there was no need for one, then I guess there was no hurry in getting one in there. However, there is need for one and Paterson is doing the right thing in trying to get one in there.

Inside, outside, leave me alone. Inside, outside, nowhere is home. Inside, outside, WHERE HAVE I BEEN!? Out of my brain on the 5:15!

---

by: Merlin @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 18:00:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm skeptical that there will be

one when the courts get done with it.

Why bother trying to install one without a strong reason if only sure thing is litigation?

---

by: wmlawman @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 18:02:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just checked the NY Constitution

And it clearly states that the Governor is to pick the lieutenant-governor at the same time, and for the same term  as the Governor at the time of an election. The Legislature did not authorize a Governor to bypass this provision of the Constitution and fill a vacancy in the Office of Lieutenant Governor. Paterson is wrong in this move according to the NY State Constitution.

Inside, outside, leave me alone. Inside, outside, nowhere is home. Inside, outside, WHERE HAVE I BEEN!? Out of my brain on the 5:15!

---

by: Merlin @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 18:10:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not Necessarily

See my post above. Statute allows for the governor to fill a position where there no other law provides to fill the vacancy. The Constitution says that the duties of a vacant Lt. Gov. falls to the temporary president of the senate, but it doesn't "fill" the Lt. Gov. position.

And the Constitution does not say that "the Governor is to pick the lieutenant-governor at the same time," which would be impossible since the governor does not "pick" the Lt. Gov.; they are both elected. So it's not unreasonable to interpret "chosen" (which is the word used in the Constitution) as referring to elections ("chosen" by voters). If so, then the statute allowing the governor to fill the vacant Lt. Gov. position may apply.

I'm not saying this is the only possible interpretation, but that the constitutionality, or unconstitutionality, is not clear.

---

by: dsimon @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 18:56:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It wasn't just that there was no need for one

As wmlawman suggests - and all the naysayers make clear - the "majority opinion" (as it were) holds that the Governor simply cannot appoint a Lt. Gov. in the event of a vacancy. I actually disagree with this reasoning, but it most definitely is the prevailing view.

The only reason to go through the difficult exercise of challenging this view is because things are such a mess right now.

---

by: DavidNYC @ Wed Jul 08, 2009 at 19:23:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

i agree with DavidNYC

this is made necessary because there is NO agreed upon Senate President.  The Sanford imbroglio came to a head partly because there was concern that nobody knew who was in charge if the Governor could not be reached.  In this case there is a constitutional crisis if Paterson dies or is incapacitated because NOONE is in charge.

I understand the general view that any action by an incredibly unpopular governor is unpopular but in this case it would be right.

Also I stick with my idea that he appoint a Republican Senator or one of the dickhead Dems to fill the spot thereby ending the tie in the Senate.

---

by: st paul sage @ Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 10:09:59 AM CDT