S.D. Sen. Johnson In Critical Condition
By California Yankee Posted in Breaking News — Comments (47) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
South Dakota Democratic Senator Tim Johnson is in critical condition, recovering from emergency surgery.
Johnson suffered stroke-like symptoms Wednesday. He became disoriented during a conference call with reporters, stuttering in response to a question. A physician came to Johnson's office and decided the Senator should go to the hospital. In a statement, Johnson's office said he had suffered a possible stroke and was "undergoing a comprehensive evaluation by the stroke team."
Our thoughts and prayers are with the senator and his family. We wish Senator Johnson a speedy recovery.
Read on.
Johnson's illness has serious political implications. The result of the last month's elections left the Democrats in position to control the Senate 51-49 in January. If Senator Johnson had to relinquish his seat, a replacement would be named by South Dakota Republican Governor Mike Rounds.
A Republican appointee would create a 50-50 tie, and allow the GOP to retain Senate control.
According to the Associated Press, there are no special restrictions on such an appointment by the governor and a replacement would not have to be from the same political party.
« Toward an Understanding of the Obamian Language — Comments (4) | In Praise Of The Happy Warrior — Comments (11) »
S.D. Sen. Johnson In Critical Condition 47 Comments (0 topical, 47 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
But, as said, it is a "cold political reality".
I would readily assume that Rounds would appoint a GOP replacement, as it is not unprecedented in the least to appoint a Senator of a different party than the one they replace.
Maybe the readers of this site can help out--has there ever been a time in history where the appointment of a Senator who belonged to a different party actually flipped control of the Senate?
When Paul Coverdell (R-GA) died in 2000, governor Barnes (D-GA) replaced him with Zell Miller (D-GA).
While Miller is/was a conservative Dem, he was a Dem none the less. The precedent has been set.
I do hope Johnson recovers, this is not the way to gain the majority.
I wonder what the rules are re seating a replacement once named? I believe the House officially decides who gets seated there, and used it once to seat a Dem instead of a Rep (in IN or MD I want to say) after some disputed election. Could the 50 Senate Dems vote against seating a Republican replacement in such a situation?
--
Bipartisanship = give + take. Republicans give. Democrats take.
The Senate rules are pretty clear that whomever the Governor appoints will fill the seat. There's nothing current Senators can do about it.
I know that appointments of the opposite party are not uncommon, but has such an appointment ever tipped the balance of power in the Senate? Miller's appointment in 2000 simply made it go from 55 Republicans to 54 Republicans; they retained the majority.
this is not the way to gain the majority.
Let's hope for a complete and speedy recovery for Senator Johnson. I will not discuss the issue beyond that sentiment. I agree with Spiker about the political speculation bing crass.
Retire Lindsey Graham. Support Thomas Ravenel for Senate 2008
Normally, I would say, "The Democrats will just forget about it because they've done it themselves," but the Democrats aren't normal. I imagine they would make a big deal about it. I'm sure our trusty media will remind everyone of the times Democrats have done the same... oh wait...
This is a tough thread to venture a comment. First and foremost Sen Johnson is a human being with family and friends, and I do hope that he recovers from his current situation.
In a jaundiced cynical kind of way, I wonder if some democrats would like to see GOP control the Senate. If they control the entire Congress they are to blame or accept credit for what the Congress does. If they only control the House, then they can still blame the Republicans. They'll gleefully say we did the right thing in the House and the GOP Senate is to blame for any problems.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
... or does reading press coverage of Sen. Johnson's condition make you feel you need to go take a shower afterward? I mean things like this gem - the first sentence from the AP-linked piece...
Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson was in critical condition Thursday after late-night brain surgery, creating political drama about which party will control the Senate next month if he is unable to continue in office.
(emphasis mine)
Ugh.
Vultures.
It's why I hate the media, honestly.
-------------
"I don't know." -- Helen Thomas, when asked by White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "Are we at war, Helen?"
then the britney-paris garbagefest of last week.
When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.
— Thomas Paine
I think most people would agree that they wish the Senator a speedy recovery however the political environment requires that the discussion be held with regards to a replacement for the Senator. I have thought for years that Senator Byrd's entourage has been making policy, that he is not mentally capable of doing so and I also believe that this Senator's staff would like to keep people in the dark with regards to his true condition as long as possible as well. This country is bigger than one man and the process must move forward there is nothing wrong with that and no one should feel "dirty" in thinking otherwise.
Peace through superior fire power:)
Only they are talking about how The Balance of Power is at "Risk."
Evil prevails only when good men do nothing.
I accept the same argument on Strom Thurmond as well, no need to replace the name of Byrd since the Senator was a D I used Byrd however you are correct on Thurmond as well. I hope for the day term limits are in place I truly believe that 4 cycles are more then enough and really after 2 they (all politicians) become beholden to someone and no longer to the people. I think Sunshine you thought you were being snarky however this site deals in true reality from all sides of the political spectrum, I hope you enjoyed your visit here now go home to Kos.
Peace through superior fire power:)
I hope I'm not jacking the thread too much, but I've long been a proponent of what I call "soft" term limits. Here in California, we have "hard" term limits. 6 years in each side of the legislative branch and 8 as the Governor and that its...forever. It did fix the "Willie Brown" problem thankfully, but it certainly has caused other serious issues.
Personally, for the Federal Government, I'd rather see a system where is the a maximum number of *concurrent* elections a Senator or Congressperson could win in the same state. Say 2 or 6 terms (so 12 years). After that, they have to take at least a 2 year sabbatical - and go out and see how real people make it. After the sabbatical, if they want then can to go back for 12 more years, assuming they can convince the electorate to vote for them and not the incumbent.
I wouldn't even mind modifying the 25th amendment so allow a retired President to run again for the the office - after a 4 year break. Of course, that would have likely put slick Willie up against W in 2004. Say what you want about Bill Clinton's morals, ethics and choice of life partners, the man knew how to campaign.
Of course, this is totally a pipe dream as it would be impossible to ever get the needed votes in Congress to pass something like this.
I am one of those evil liberal easterners but before you zap me or whatever I must say that I find the discussion about Senator Johnson's crisis most civilized and measured here. This is an excerpt from salon that I think sheds some light on where we are with this situation and it's implications for control of the senate:
...Bob Burns, political science head at South Dakota State University, believes Rounds would stay true to his party.
"It would be expected that Governor Rounds would appoint a Republican, if in fact the seat would be vacated, which would bring a tie (in the Senate) and (Vice President) Cheney would be the deciding vote."
Democrats won a 51-49 majority in the November election.
Burns pointed out, however, that Rounds could appoint no replacement unless there was a vacancy.
"Even if he were physically incapacitated, there's really no provision to vacate the position unless he resigns," Burns said.
Burns noted that the late-U.S. Sen. Karl Mundt, who was re-elected in 1966, suffered a stroke in 1969 and did not vacate his seat.
"He served out the remainder of his term with his staff basically serving as the senator," Burns said...
reaching for a seated senator who had taken the oath having a stroke and having his staff vote for him thereafter.
Um... Excuse me, Johnson hasn't taken the oath yet, so no, the seat won't be occupied. Which last time I checked, means it is vacant. If I can recognize that, you'd think a professional political scientist could as well.
Crimeiny.
to retake the oath each new congress?
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
Johnson re-swore his oath in 2003, after he defeated John Thune, so he is in office until the end of his term, if we want to be technical about oaths.
However, the oath is cerimonial. There is no legal requirement to be in the Senate other than "to be elected". Everything, from the date of being sworn in to taking an oath of office, is peripheral. Tim Johnson was re-elected in 2002. His term ends in 2009, and the only two possible ways he will not serve it out is if he dies or resigns before then.
I haven't looked up the rules but I presume the Senate can expel a member just like the House can.
"I am afraid that even after the American people will elect those who promise to leave Iraq, the U.S. will not do so." - Hamas leader Abu Abdullah
From an AEI monograph, 2002:
On the other side, there have been many cases of members of Congress who have not been able to show up to vote or perform their duties, but who have remained in office. Senator Carter Glass in the 1940s is one example. As is Senator Karl Mundt, whose committee slots were declared vacant by the Republican Conference, but who remained formally in his seat until his death in late 1974 despite total incapacity for a considerable period of time. The practice has been that an incapacitated member is not removed unless that person stands for reelection, wins and cannot be seated for a new term because of the incapacity.
In North Dakota, Senator Quentin Burdick tottered along, increasingly hospitalized, not recognizing his surroundings, throughout the early 1990s.
It was a shame and an embarrassment -- for him and the public -- but N.D. Democratic power structure did not want to run the risk of losing the seat. In the end, they played cynical switching games in 1992, with Sen. Conrad "retiring" and then quickly running to replace Burdick in a special election that December after Burdick's death. It's too complicated and boring of a story, but the Dems were happy to have a senile Burdick embarrass himself in public as long as they held the seat.
That said, Burdick played along to the extent he was able, too. He was an arrogant old jerk, too.
I can't help the doctors, but I can make sure everyone knows the law:
12-11-4. Temporary appointment by Governor to fill vacancy in United States Senate. Pursuant to the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, the Governor may fill by temporary appointment, until a special election is held pursuant to this chapter, vacancies in the office of senator in the Senate of the United States.
12-11-5. Special election to fill senate vacancy. The special election to fill the vacancy of a senator shall be held at the same time as the next general election. The general election laws shall apply unless inconsistent with this chapter.
12-11-6. No special election if appointed senator's term expires at normal time. No special election, to fill a vacancy, may be held if the term of office of the appointed senator expires in the month of January immediately following the next general election that would occur after the vacancy.
Some discussion on the blogosphere has focused on 12-11-1 but it does not apply to Senate vacancies. The brief answer is that the law allows the Governor to appoint anyone he wants who will serve until the next general election in 2008.
The official act that determines Majority Leader, et al., takes place on January 4th, 2007, and is called an "organizing resolution". Under usual circumstances, such a resolution is in effect until the beginning of the next Congress. So after it is enacted, even if Tim Johnson resigns and a Republican is appointed in his place, Reid will still be Majority Leader and Democrats will still head the committees. In fact, even if 20 Democrats resign and they're all replaced by Republicans, those positions would still be intact from January 4th, 2007 to January 4th, 2009.
But there is, as always, a catch.
Like any other resolution, it must be passed. It can be amended--for instance, to add a clause that states if the majority should shift during the course of the session, the Majority Leader and Committee Chairs will shift with it. And it can be filibustered, if there are 41 or more Senators (or, for instance, 49 Republicans) who agree not to vote for cloture until such a clause is added.
For those with exceptionally sharp memories, you may remember that Senate Democrats did just that in January 2001, following the election of a razor-thin majority for Republicans in 2000. And, for those who aren't complete novices, you probably recall a certain Senator from Vermont who left the Republican Party and, though claimed himself an Independent, caucused with the Democrats, giving them the majority and chairmanship of committees. Handy timing, wasn't it?
in 2000 the Senate was 50-50 after the election, and now its 51-49. but your analysis should still apply
I didn't claim to be unbiased. I am very biased and identified myself as a liberal easterner. So do the senators have to retake their oath of office every two years whether or not they ran for election the previous november?
The seat is occupied. Senators take the oath at the beginning of their terms and that's it. There is no mass swearing of all Senators at the beginning of each new Congress. Only those Senators elected in Nov., whose terms begin in Jan., will take the oath. So Sen. Johnson is still occupying the seat until he resigns or passes away.
(Reuters) - U.S. Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson was in critical condition on Thursday after undergoing brain surgery for a rare condition, congenital arteriovenous malformation.
-- A congenital arteriovenous malformation occurs when the arteries connect directly to the veins in a part of the brain, without a cushion of tiny capillaries to slow the flow of blood from the arteries.
-- When they burst and bleed, they often kill patients before they can get to the hospital.
-- Quick surgery can stop the bleeding and prevent brain damage.
-- Like an aneurysm, these malformations cause few or no symptoms unless they burst. They can occasionally cause headaches or seizures.
-- Corrective treatment closes the connection, sending blood to stronger vessels in the brain. Full recovery is possible.
took a real softball shot at him, he's having issues adjusting.
Hey singe, welcome to RedState. Relax. Don't take it personally, when it becomes personal we'll let you know. We're happy to have liberals here, but please think thru your posts before you hit the button to post. Post rational stuff and you'll be treated respectfully - although don't expect much in the way of "me too".
And FWIW, I thought the title of the post above was cute and kinda creative.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
I thought the Gadfly in #14 introduced the snark norm to the dialog. I will not repeat the offense.
Just label it. Look, you're new. You're a self identified liberal (which is fine), but we've been overrun with mobys and jerks lately so pretend like you're on probation. If you have a point to make, make it directly. If you want be snarky, just label it..
Again, welcome. Have a cup of coffee. Enjoy your time at RS. And if you want to see how a longtime liberal handles life here, check out flyerhawk.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
Thanks for the welcome. I probably won't bother you folks too much with my thoughts but I had heard so much bad stuff about redstate I figured at a time when Democrats are obviously stressed and freaked out I would read some of the pieces over here for myself. Most seems pretty well thought out, compassionate and reasonable. Who knows, we may be from the same species.
You seem to be thoughtful. Thoughtful people are welcome here and you will add to the discussion.
And who knows, you may end up like gamecock who used to be a liberal :>).
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
reading posts that are not profanity-filled however.
--
Bipartisanship = give + take. Republicans give. Democrats take.
if I see one of those old Ford panel trucks outside my window tonight unloading large pods I'm outta here!
you win hands down.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?
As the terminator says (one of your guys but out doing our guys at our own game?): I'll be back.
You can directly reply to a comment by clicking "Reply to this" underneath someone else's post. This will indent your reply underneath it, which is handy for 1) both keeping track of conversations, and 2) keeping the discussion organized.
Welcome to RedState.
Best wishes to his friends and family.
Well, regardless of the outcome of this immediate situation (and I don't think we should really be wishing to reclaim the majority on the misfortune of others), this will probably mean that the seat will be open in 2008, as it does not sound like Johnson will be in a condition to run for re-election. And if he did, I'm sure his health would be a lurking issue in the campaign (could/would this kind of thing happen again in the future).
I hope that he recovers fully and is able to serve with full vigor.
....and Sen. Johnson be unable to continue as senator(I'm sincerely hoping, as a fellow American, he recovers), South Dakota's Republican Governor Rounds Mike Rounds would name a replacement.
How long do you think it would take the Democrats and the media(yes, same thing)to launch a campaign demanding that Rounds respect "the will of the people" and appoint a Democrat? I'd say about half an hour.
One would hope Rounds would be strong enough to resist such crassness.