If the possibility exists for the special election to be held in the already-scheduled 2009 local election, then why doesn't the legislature simply require a retention election in 2009 of the pick that Quinn makes. This would give the voters a say in the appointment but also allow an expeditious solution (and one that favors the seat remaining in Democratic hands). This is how New York deals with filling vacancies, as the Paterson appointee will have to stand for retention in 2010 and re-election in 2012. It seems a tailor-made approach for situation like Illinois is experiencing where the appointee doesn't want to be tainted by state politics.

Gotta love it. Blago isn't even charged with any crime (whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty) and you already claim that the Lt. Gov should step in. So to keep a theoretic $1 million out of Blago's war chest (and doing something which apparent almost all politicians do in these circumstance namely making sure that the appointee feels indebted to the appointer) the state should spend $30-50 million at a time when we are in an economin crisis.

Gotta love it.

If the special were cancelled, the vacancy would have to be filled by Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn stepping in at least temporarily to make an appointment, and the situation could potentially set the Dems up for some danger in holding on to the seat by 2010. Whoever gets picked will face extra scrutiny, there would be questions about whether they were involved in the Blago scandal, and the possibility would exist for a backlash against the Dems because of the cancelled election plans.

Or not.

Eric, my sweet, you're getting ahead of yourself again.

Blago needs to resign for now.

I really don't think he's going to do that. He doesn't give me that impression at all. He gives me the impression that he's thinking that his entire front of innocence depends upon his carrying on as if he'd never been charged.

That's what I'm getting from him so far, anyway.

fracking tags!

Blago needs to resign for now.

O shit - I broke comments.

I haven't done that for ages.

Well I just finished (surfed off early) a panel discussion on MSNBC with Jonathan Alter and some other guy just after the Obama press conference ....the Special Election is the best shot for the GOP in IL...so they said

Nice to have the 180 view from Eric

There's no "cancelled election" or "cancelled election plans". It was just a dumb idea floated as an answer to the perceptual problems Blagojevich's schemes gave the left by panicked misguided nervous nellies.

Changing the succession law from the governor picking the replacement to a special election damages the prospects of any Illinois senator ever getting the presidential nomination again. If we had such a procedure in place a year ago it might have very well have been the difference between a president elect Barack and Hillary right now. I don't see NY comtemplating changing their law.

I hate to keep harping on this but the answer to fixing those problems is putting stiff restrictions and penalties on pay to play in Illinois, not hamstringing any Illinois senator running for the nomination in the future. We have few enough good politicians as it is in this state. There's no reason to discourage the best of them from even making their careers here.

As a lifetime Illinois resident, let me say a few things:

1. There isn't going to be a special election. No way. The R's would like to have one since it gives them at least a shot at the seat, but that's all you need to know about why there won't be one. The Dems control both houses of the legislature and all statewide offices. Why in hell would they have a special election, where the seat would be at risk, vs. just appointing someone?

2. I can't imagine where Eric got the idea that an appointed Senator would be disadvantaged in 2010, but it just isn't so. Incumbents always have the advantage, and Pat Quinn is well-respected enough that whoever he appoints is not going to be tainted by Blago's problems.

3. They're NOT going to appoint a caretaker to the position. Why in hell would they do that? Why would they give up the advantage of incumbency in 2010?

4. The muni elections in the spring are NOT statewide. Some cities have them next spring, others don't. Chicago does not. The cost of a special election, even if held on Apr 7, would be considerable.

5. The appointment is Lisa Madigan's if she wants it. She's the only one with statewide recognition. Otherwise there are a number of potential candidates.

Will the senate seat selections in Illinois, Minnesota, and New York overshadow the general election?

No. The only reason they're big news now is there is no other political news except for Obama picking his cabinet. Do you think the MSM's story about "lefties incensed over Obama's picks" had any merit? Well this gives them something to talk about other than financial stuff they know even less about that just makes people turn the channel.

I'm curious if someone knows the answer to this:

If they proceed with impeachment prior to the Feds presenting their case, what facts, actual facts, will they have to proceed with. Are the statements by the Feds in the charges to be considered facts prior to them being challenged in court? Blago has not admitted any of this is true has he? Would the legislature impeach based on allegations?