Former Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry will become the next nominee for Secretary of State, replacing Hillary Clinton and creating another Senate vacancy.
President Obama will formally announce the nomination today at the White House, according to sources. He is not expected to face much resistance in the Senate for confirmation. Kerry will likely recuse himself from the confirmation hearings, since they would take place at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which he chairs. But there’s no word on when or if Kerry will step down from the Senate, the timing of which triggers a series of vacancy laws in Massachusetts.
Those laws are made to be rewritten, and as I noted the first time this nomination became clear, there is no reason why the Massachusetts legislature will live with a situation where they have to hold a special election for Kerry’s seat within 150 days of him stepping down. On two prior occassions, the mostly Democratic legislature changed their Senate vacancy law for maximum partisan advantage – in 2004, when they reacted to Kerry’s potential elevation to the Presidency and Mitt Romney’s opportunity to name a replacement by creating the quick special election process, and in 2009, when they reacted to Ted Kennedy’s death by allowing for a gubernatorially-selected interim replacement, so Senate Democrats could pass health care. The legislature could simply move out the special election to the time of the next general election in Massachusetts, in this case 2014. That would eliminate the possibility of a quick-strike, short-term campaign, where soon-to-be-former Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, would probably have the advantage, especially if Democratic Governor Deval Patrick did not run. A 2014 election would give time for Democrats to build a campaign with another candidate, and would put the election at the same time as the gubernatorial election and House elections in the state, which would probably change the turnout model. I fully expect this to happen, and Governor Patrick told a local radio show recently that he would sign such a bill.
As for an interim replacement, the intriguing possibility is retiring House mainstay Barney Frank. But there are a number of other options.
I would refer back to my earlier comments about Kerry’s expected performance at the job. He’s a mainstream Democrat who will offer a mainstream, establishment perspective to diplomacy and foreign policy. I don’t see it changing the outcomes all that much.





15 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Eh? Not a huge lover of Kerry, but he’ll do the job. Just more of the same old, same old.
My bet: get ready for the Swift Boat attacks. Kerry never deserved that to begin with, but let’s see if the lilly-livered so-called “Democrats” fight back or just capitulate to lying bullies this time or not.
Any bets on that?
will kerry, who I have read attempted to pass climate carbon law, aprove keystone xl pipeline?
If you have run for President as a candidate from the R’s or D’s you are preapproved for any other office or commission. Kerry, like Gore, couldn’t beat Muttonhead George because they wre not offering a real difference and lacked charisma (if George’s have a beer with could be considered charisma) but Kerry, Gore, and McCain, Mittens were acceptable second choices.
Yes, he will. He’ll do what he’s told.
What is Obama’s need to nominate Cabinet officers from iffy seats? Arizona and Kansas bolted away from reality after Napolitano and Sebelius were named and have never returned.
When Kerry came back from ‘Nam he was magnificent. But like all even moderately progressive politicians, he soon faced the choice of gelding or destruction and settled for the former. No significant policy or even style changes from HRC.
Agree with all you said. I suppose at least Kerry hasn’t – at least not yet – gotten as batshit bugfuck as old Walnuts McCain, who *used to* be a somewhat decent pol for a Republican… now just a nutty quack-quacker.
Kerry is on record is stating that even knowing what he knows now, he would still have voted to support the Iraq War. Oy, oy, oy….
The other day Dukakis on Boston CBS local advised the legislature not to diddle ywt again with that succession law. He’s on his way back to UCLA to teach, BTW, and he isn’t interested in the seat at all.
It’s already been changed twice since 2007, once to prevent then Gov Romney from making an appointment. Then again to allow Patrick to appoing Paul Kirk as interim for a few months, fully expecting Coakley then to breeze right in there.
First of all I really don’t think Dems need to worry about losing that seat. If they play the cards right, with Lynch, Meehan, Markey, then Brown won’t win. I like Capuano the best but don’t think he’s a good fit against Brown statewide. I’m afraid C would lose the entire South Shore and Cape Cod for sure, where I live, and probably west of I-495 as well. But there are the others, whom Brown won’t beat.
The last time, just after Ted K passed away, the sense of urgency was palpable amidst ACA travails to get Kirk in there in a hurry to cover that seat. That’s not the case this time. Even if Brown won (he wouldn’t) the end result would be a pissant’s difference in the balance of power.
Leave the law as is. However tempting, changing it again will look bad and pretty much preclude a MA pol from ever again scolding the GOP about all the gerrymandered districts around the country. Yes, that’s technically a different issue, but the look, feel, and smell would be too similar to ignore.
Question to ask self: Does AIPAC gain or lose in this appointment? If one looks at the Nexen deal and the F-35/US control of Canada air space, etc. it’s clear that the bankstas work together above and through the vehicle of the “nation-state” while the UN and ICC, in net, function to *not* be a deterrent to PTB a¢tivitie$. So, I don’t see why folks insist on pretending that the US and Chinese PTB don’t work together. Presently it looks to me that the “pivot to Asia” is code for the US PTB working with the Chinese PTB as the preferred partner in asset stripping the 99% in the new target region of focus (asia). With signalling that’s it OK for Palestine to receive some kind of recognition at the UN but Tibet is roundly ignored, will the Israeli PTB get kicked to the curb because the “Middle East” is not so of interest for resource stripping and, hence, the Israelis lose their usefulness and because their methods of attempting to control the 99% are less effective than those of the Chinese PTB?
One possible twist… I understand that Deval Patrick is fairly unpopular in Mass. In 2010, he won with 48.4% of the vote in a three way race. But IIRC, there were October 2010 polls that showed three candidates (D, R and a D running as a 3rd party) each in the 30% to 35% range… indicating dissatisfaction with Patrick.
If Patrick wants to move to the Senate, then his competition would likely want to minimize his self-appointment to the five month window… rather than allow him two full years as a Senator.
I agree that the Dem dominated legislature is willing to openly act in the name of the party. But self-interest will outweigh party-interest. So if Patrick wants that Senate seat, I doubt the legislature changes the rule. Patrick will probably need to promise that the two year appointment goes to a placeholder, before the legislature changes the law.
Not knowing the situation well, I could see Patrick appoint himself for five months… and take his chances in a wide open primary.
And let’s not forget that the Jan 2010 primary to succeed Kirk had a turnout in the 60%+ range… on par with a Gubernatorial election anyway… though Tea Party enthusiasm may have been different at that moment in time, than say June 2013.
Another Obama surrogate (that being Kerry) who refused to sign Senator Sanders pledge not to cut the big 3: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
Let the countries he will be dealing with in the future know that he won’t stand up for their people’s human rights.
Wonderful. Rice is browbeaten into bowing out in favor of the Skull & Bones nominee. Apparently, taking a dive twice for his fellow Bonesman in 2004, once for the election, and again for the Ohio recount, wasn’t enough to satisfy Lurch’s sense of civic duty.
As usual, Obama is more about polishing his own image rather than helping his fellow Dems or making his base happy. He uses us when he needs us, and then forgets us when he doesn’t.
“. . .And let’s not forget that the Jan 2010 primary to succeed Kirk had a turnout in the 60%+ range… on par with a Gubernatorial election anyway… though Tea Party enthusiasm may have been different at that moment in time, than say June 2013. . .”
———–
True, but look at where the uninspired, paltry turnout occurred. . .which Coakley needed.
Are you suggesting there’s a one percenter in drag at work here?
C’est impossible, non?”