******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Why Is Paul Kirk Still Voting?

From Hotline On-Call (h/t):

Aides to Sens. Paul Kirk (D-MA) and Kay Hagan (D-NC) tell Hotline OnCall they will vote for Bernanke's confirmation.
There is an elected and qualified successor to Paul Kirk. His name is Scott Brown. Martha Coakley has conceded the race, and there are not enough absentee ballots to change the five-point spread.

Brown reportedly will be sworn in next Monday or Tuesday, although other reports put it later.

As Brown said the night of the election, Kirk's service is completed:
Interim Senator Paul Kirk has completed his work as a senator by appointment of the governor, and for the work he has done, I thank him. The people, by their votes, have now filled the office themselves, and I am ready to go to Washington without delay.
Paul Kirk should not be voting on anything, period.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
Bookmark and Share


  1. Yeah, I got a MegaVote update in my email this morning that notified me that Kirk voted against the Thune amdt to terminate TARP.

    The first thing that ran through my mind was...why is he still voting??

    I'm a MA resident who voted for Brown, and this makes me extremely unhappy.

  2. Let's make sure Kirk doesn't get paid past election day, either.


  3. Also, let's not ignore the Senate's own precedents, as describeded by the Democratic leadership back in the 50s by LBJ (see page 7):

  4. Sickening. And of course, not a peep about this from the fringe media.

  5. I made call to Kirk's office (202) 224-4543. His office told me that if a vote occurs on the floor, he will be able to vote until Brown is sworn in.

    I told his office that Kirk should not vote because Brown won. Kirk's office said that the Boston Globe told them that the Boston Globe said Brown is scheduled to be sworn in on Feb. 11th & that Kirk could vote until then.

    Folks, this sounds messed up to me. Kirk should of already had his bags packed. What sounds weird to me is that Kirk's office gets info. from Newspaper.

  6. He has no right to be voting. Why are the Republicans doing nothing to prevent this? His role is finished.

  7. BTW I noticed this same thing yesterday. I made a comment somewhere about it... not sure where... either way, Kirk is ignoring Brown who told him to his face that his job is finished.

    He is going against the MA law itself by remaining in the Senate when his role expired as of January 19

  8. I don't understand why there are laws and rules governing the Senate when there are no repercussions for breaking them. Remember when Berney Sanders pulled his amendment because he was upset the Republicans were having it be read? And he was allowed to even though it went against Senate rules pretty obviously. Now, the Senate is breaking Massachusetts law by allowing Kirk to vote. Again I ask, why are the people in charge allowed to play loose and fast with the rules and laws governing them? Where are the checks and balances on our most powerful leaders? I'm sure the Dems would be throwing a fit if the situation was reversed.

  9. @Mike I am sure that their heads would be exploding if the situation was reversed.