Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) is recovering from surgery after suffering stroke-like symptoms during a conference call with reporters yesterday. Apparently the problem was not a stroke but cerebral bleeding caused by a defect in one or more blood vessels (“an intracerebral bleed caused by a congenital arteriovenous malformation”). The political ramifications of Sen. Johnson’s condition are obvious, but for now let’s just hope for a full recovery.
Reader Interactions
68Comments
Comments are closed.
Zifnab
He’s from South Dakota too, so you know they’d pick some crazy SOB to replace him. God bless modern medicine.
Slide
Had to love Chris Wallace’s comment on the Imus show this morning discussing the political ramifications if Senator Johnson’s condition “goes South”.
ThymeZone
It’s a great country when the fate of the Terri Schiavos and the Sen. Johnsons can be immediately measured and presented in political terms.
Thanks to the GOP, everything is politics and politics is everything.
Clean, simple, strong. I like it.
Doctor: Mrs. Johnson, the surgery is over, and right now it looks like your husband will still be able to vote on the Senate floor next month. He may be in a wheelchair and he may need some coaching, but he’ll be able to make a quorum.
Mrs. J: Thank God!
etc
Steve
I hope he gets better. When that Republican from Wyoming announced he had leukemia a few months back, I hoped he would get better. It’s really not that hard.
Jake
So I’m not the only one who finds all the political analysis of this man’s health a little…grotesque. Not to mention premature. The man just had someone fiddle with his BRAIN for cripesakes. Not to mention an unspecified period eating the blandest crap on earth. {Hospital food, shudder!} I think I’d rather the media went back to commenting on Pelosi’s ensembles.
Pb
And, yes, the AP gets the ‘worst headline evar’ award for this one (“Senate Back to 50-50 With Johnson Out”) — apparently they’re already rooting for death, and the appointment of a Republican–thanks, AP!
Steve
Everything I’ve read suggests that he’s likely to be okay, but with any brain surgery there’s a period where it’s automatically “too soon to tell” because of the unavoidable swelling. Since I fit one of the traditional definitions of a lawyer (“a Jewish person who can’t stand the sight of blood”) I don’t know any more than that.
demimondian
The interesting question raised (believe it or not) by MSNBC is the question of whether any level of incapacity short of death or resignation is sufficient to declare a seat “vacant”. Dispassionately ignoring the horror Johnson’s family must be suffering, the question of whether someone with PVS is able to hold a seat in the Senate is an intriguing one.
Zifnab
It’s a bit ghoulish, but Dems just made an epic comeback in one of the tightest elections in memory. The guy’s a sitting Blue Senator in a Red State. I’m not surprised that the first thing people think of when they hear the news is “Political Rollercoaster!”
I know the first thing I thought when I heard the news was “Oh crap, the ‘Pubs just got back the Senate. Maybe they’ll start calling the stroke a man date from heavan.”
Ryan S.
I know its the pot calling the kettle black but I gotta rofl at that.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
ThymeZone
scs will be issuing a statement shortly.
AFter she administers the balloon test.
nichevo
Steve:
This explains a lot about you ;>
I too hope he has the best possible outcome. It is nice that no one has yet accused Cheney of feeding him polonium or the like. My cousin is a hotshot neurosurgeon, oy, but no doubt the Senator is getting first-class treatment already and does not need Robert to fly out to DC or South Dakota. If he has time to respond, I could grill him for a medical opinion on the matter.
While I understand that you really, really want his vote and so forth, he may decide to spend more time with his family while able. I hope partisanship will not compel him to work himself to death (assuming you believe that Senators work). Be dispassionate by all means – I often recommend it – but do let’s allow him the benefit of his own and his family’s.
Pb – hardly rooting in the sense that they favor the GOP. More that, like the sons of Ares, they batten on chaos and conflict. IOW, “they just wanna sell newspapers.” I haven’t the least doubt that they would be just as happy with the illness of a GOP Senator throwing the balance into question, have you?
Besides, you can no doubt always get a Chafee or whoever to flip. Take it easy.
Krista
Would it be inappropriate to insert a Mark Foley joke here? Yeah…I thought so.
Tsulagi
The question interested me too. Yesterday I did a little quick googling. From what I could find, no level of medical incapacity triggers a vacancy. Seems courts have stayed away from that can of worms in the past.
The most recent example I could find involved a Republican senator also from SD. The guy had an incapacitating stroke in 1969 with four years remaining on his term. He said he would allow the governor to pick only his wife as a replacement. The governor refused. So his seat effectively remained vacant; the senator never cast another vote.
Seems the only ways a seat can be declared vacant are through death, resignation, or successful impeachment.
scarshapedstar
Ahem.
J’accuse!
Actually, my pet theory is that he was about to board one of those infamous Democratic small-planes-o’-doom but God saved him. His office won’t let me see his schedule, though.
Jake
Nope.
Vladi G
Even if he’s in a coma, he’ll probably still go to more votes than Joe Lieberman.
ThymeZone
Has Bill Frist made his video diagnosis yet?
Depending on how they have the (bless him) ailing Senator propped up in bed, Frist could ascertain whether he is leaning left, or right.
Tsulagi
Or if he’s laying face down with his eyes closed, his hands over his ears, and his ass up in the air, Frist could declare him a true Republican.
Sorry, mom.
Tsulagi's Mom
Did I raise you to speak like that? Have some manners!
Mike
His votes would be more intelligently thought out and honest as well.
scs
Let’ see how eager the Left is to pull the plug on him if he lands in PVS. All of sudden Dems will see the light of how important ‘right to life’ is.
TenguPhule
Foley has already inserted himself into far too many things.
TenguPhule
I see Scs survived her little gagging fit back on Dick Cheney’s Dick Cheney.
And still as ghoulish as ever.
Dustbin Of History
Let’s see how eager the Right is to pull the plug on him if he lands in PVS.
I can already hear it now: ‘B-B-But Terry Schiavo…’
nichevo
OK, here comes teh nasty. Probably my fault, oops.
scarshapedstar, at least you were funny. I thought of Wellstone too. (Did you think of Heinz?)
But I actually thought you were going to go for Snakes-On-A-Plane, which would give anybody a stroke.
Steve
Is the jury really out on this one? Heck, they held a majority up until last month.
My friends over at Daily Kos made several polonium references yesterday, and not all of them were merely black humor. Pretty sick.
PeterJ
scs rambled:
The next of kin makes the decision about pulling the plug. In the Schiavo case that was the husband, not her parents. If it would ever come to this in this case (and hopefully it won’t) then the wife and no one else will be the one deciding, since she’s The Decider(tm). And her wish should and will be respected.
Sadly you have proven to be unable to understand this priniciple.
Steve
This myth keeps coming up. The only relevant issue under Florida law was what Terri wanted, period. If it had been the parents who said she wanted to die, and the husband who wanted to keep her alive, the case would have come out the exact same way if the court determined that’s what Terri wanted. The law varies from state to state, but at least in Florida the husband doesn’t get some special decisionmaking power by being the husband.
Big Pimpin'
For a moment there the Pugglies were remembering the two plane crash Senate majority they enjoyed of a few years back.
How their spirits soared!
PeterJ
Steve, I don’t ever recall seeing anything in writing about what Terri Schiavo wanted.
While it would be great if every person had a living will, most don’t. So the relatives will have to decide about medical decisions, and I don’t know any state where the will of the spouse doesn’t outranks the will of the parents.
Anway, even if the the parents might have something to say about it, it will still be up to the relatives to decide. It won’t be decided by the Senate, the Democratic Party, the voters of South Dakota, or their governor.
Steve
Of course there was nothing in writing. That doesn’t change the fact that the applicable legal standard required the court to determine what SHE wanted, not what her husband wanted.
If the court found that there was no evidence whatsoever of what she wanted, then she stays on the feeding tube, period. It doesn’t matter what her spouse wanted or what her parents wanted at that point. The only thing that matters under Florida law – and you can go check the statute book if you don’t believe me – is competent evidence relating to the wishes of the poor soul in the coma.
DougJ
Bill Frist just saw a videotape of Johnson and declared him brain dead.
Zifnab
I don’t remember that legal president at all. Last I checked you could pull a feeding tube off a sick infant in Texas if the doctors thought it wasn’t going to survive.
Also, last I checked, the Coulterites of the world wanted to pull the plug on Ginsberg and she wasn’t even in the hospital. Of course, these are the same hyenas who swear by Bill “Terrorists should attack San Fransciso” O’Reily. ‘Right to Life’ my ass.
Steve
Well, that would be due to a lack of insurance money, which is a different issue altogether. Not to mention, Texas is not Florida. States have different laws.
Richard 23
Your BDS knows no bounds!
David
Just a note: South Dakota law requires a special election if a sitting senator leaves office early. The governor would still appoint an interim replacement if Johnson doesn’t recover, but we’re not talking about an automatic Republican gain that would last through 2008.
demimondian
So, Steve…would the controlling legal authority be South Dakota law (Johnson’s state of residence) or Federal law (covering DC, at the corner of 14th and N, where GWU hospital is)? Do they have different standards?
demimondian
Cite? I believe you, I’d just like a page I can cite to others.
CaseyL
There are quite a few precedents for mentally incapacitated Senators staying in office. Exhibit A: Strom Thurmond.
Some Senators, when faced with a terminal diagnosis, have resigned because they had better things to do with their time than politics. Exhibit A: Paul Tsongas.
Some do not. Some Senators, faced with serious medical conditions, decide to stay in office. Exhibit A: Arlen Spector.
We have even had Presidents in office well past their mental pull date. Exhibit A: Warren Harding. Exhibit B: Ronald Reagan.
In other words, there is established precedent for whatever Senator Johnson decides to do.
Face
Word on the street is that Johnson faked this stroke to get out of being sent to fight in Iraq. Further word is that the docs looked at both his EEG and the current troop levels in Bahgdad, and decided they will be sending him anyway.
Steve
That’s a very good question. Law professors hate guys like you.
David
Demimondian: I can’t find the SD law at the moment, but you should be able to cite the case of Stephanie Herseth, who holds the state’s sole House seat. She won a special election in June 2004 following Rep. Bill Janklow’s resignation (after a manslaughter conviction).
David
Never mind, found it.
Link
“If a vacancy occurs in the office of a senator or representative in the United States Congress it shall be the duty of the Governor within ten days of the occurrence, to issue a proclamation setting the date of and calling for a special election for the purpose of filling such vacancy.”
David
Argh, HTML failed me. Trying to avoid breaking the page here.
tinyurl.com/w4ehl
Or search through legis.state.sd.us/statutes
Keith
Dear Sen. Johnson,
Please don’t go swimming in the ocean with any stoner hippies claiming to be your brother. It’s a trick.
Steve
You need to keep reading.
The next general election is in November 2008. Only Congressmen get an immediate special election.
Jake
And Foley Catheters are frequently inserted into hospital patients. Wow. It’s almost, like, karmic.
DougJ
He’ll certainly spend less time on “Meet the Press”.
The Other Steve
Christ, you’d think Republicans would at least have the common decency to wish him a speedy recovery.
No, instead they’re dancing around hoping the guy dies?
Fuckheads.
Jay C
Sorry to have to disappoint the ghouls – but it looks like Sen. Johnson is going to live , after all. And probably be able to get back to work in the Senate, too.
DougJ
How does this affect his re-election chances in 2008, though? After all, that’s a lot more important than whether he lives or dies, right?
Perry Como
I hear there are alot of buildings to be renamed.
David
Steve: Read more carefully.
David
…or I’m dumb and didn’t notice that the law refers to senators and representatives differently, even though it refers to “the United States Congress” and not the House or the Senate. Bah.
Steve
Right. It says “a vacancy in the office of representative in the United States Congress” which means one but not the other. :)
I had to read the statutes like 5 times before I finally figured out what they were trying to do here, and I get paid to do this. (Of course, when you get paid by the hour, it’s not necessarily bad if you need 5 readings.)
Sherard
So which GOP operative was holding the gun to Tim’s head when he wrote:
Just curious. How this is the GOP’s fault is beyond me.
Sherard
Black is white! Up is down! The AP shills for Republicans.
Are you KIDDING me ? What is the color of the sky on your planet ? This particular delusion, that the media is biased, but leans to the right, has to be the single most looney form of moonbatism going. It must be hard to stand up with such powerful forces of insanity swirling in your head.
John S.
Fixed.
Speaking of insanity…how do you stand up with all those powerful forces of lunacy swirling in your head, Sherard?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Bombadil
OK, Here’s the full section of Sout Dakota law Steve and David cited above, and it is confusing.
It appears that the issue is moot, as Sen. Johnson looks to be recovering well, but as an exercise…
If I read this right, if the Congresscritter died or otherwise left office, it’s pretty clear that the governor has 10 days to issue a proclamation setting the date for the election of his replacement.
Now, if Congresscritter was in the House of Representatives, and the primary or general election is within six months, the seat will filled by an election held on that date. Makes sense since it’s a shorter term than in the Senate.
But then there’s that “otherwise”. Does “otherwise” refer only to the circumstances where the elected official is in the House and the election is more than six months off, or does it also include circumstances where the elected official is a Senator (which the “six-month” rule doesn’t appear to cover — it specifically says an election to fill a vacancy in the office of representative in the United States Congress)?
Even after reading Steve and David’s interpretations (thanks, guys), I’m still confused.
CJ
Bombadil
It appears as if the term ‘representative’ in the last sentence is used in its generic sense, i.e. both Representatives and Senators are representatives. While the paragraph is inartfully drafted, the most reasonable construction would have both types of ‘representatives’ treated the same way. There doesn’t seem to be any basis in the statute language itself for different treatment of Senators and Representatives, not that one who wanted to could make arguments to suit their own purposes; they could.
I would be more interested in what constitutes a “vacancy” under South Dakota law. If you recall the old Al Haig “I’m in control here” bit, it doesn’t take much for motivated people to decide that they get to make the decisions. I wonder if we’ll see a move to declare Johnson incompetent as a means of creating a vacancy.
CJ
Zifnab
I don’t know what the hell the media is doing at the moment. The fact that they’re trying to pander to everyone at once rather than actually reporting the news continues to baffle me.
By the end of 2020, I wouldn’t be surprised to see completely parallel partisan newspapers with E! serving as some sort of bizarre middle ground that no one gives a shit about.
Somewhere, Edward R. Murrow weeps.
ThymeZone
They do whatever it takes to attract customers, which means viewers/readers/page views.
Steve
I’m pretty sure I’m right, because otherwise the section of the statute I cited would be completely meaningless.
Pb
Sherard,
That’s how most of your posts sound, too…
Check. And as further proof, I cite John Solomon. Your rebuttal?
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Look, moron, if I were KIDDING you, then you wouldn’t know it, because you’d BELIEVE it–you’d swallow it fucking hook, line, and sinker, just like you do with every other partisan absurdity on your side of the aisle. But don’t take my word for it–just search for ‘Sherard’ around here sometimme. Sheesh.
Blue. You should come visit here sometime and check it out, it’s nice. We call it ‘Earth’.
It is.
Sometimes it does, as I have mentioned, citing examples–something else you should try sometime.
That’s right, folks–it’s “looney” (sic) because Sherard says so! Well shit, I can’t argue with that reasoning! Pack it up, folks, Sherard wins, citing Sherard again! How does he do it?!
It must be hard for you to stand up, considering how much your head must weigh for you to come up with such brilliant insights here, day after day. We’re not worthy. Really. I suggest you seek out a worthier forum for your brilliance, like Protein Wisdom, or perhaps an I Love Lucy lookalike convention. Anywhere but here would be a good start, though.
David
The statute does distinguish between senators and representatives – note the first sentence, which says that the law applies if “a senator or representative” vacates his/her office. To me, that says that where the law says it applies to “representatives,” it implies “and not senators.”
Bombadil
CJ, Steve and David — I agree with all of you! I’ve read it to mean that senators and representatives are treated differently, and can see where it uses “representative” generically (if it doesn’t, then it’s hard to determine what happens for “senators”).
Hopefully, Johnson will recover and the whole issue will go away. I doubt anyone in the SD legislature will be sufficiently motivated to try to clean up the law.
Tulkinghorn
David is right here – a Judge will apply a distinction consistently, under the charming notion that the legislature means what it says and says what it means.