Martha McSally should be the Senior Senator from Arizona (Congress: appointed, office)

[milkit]

First, of, let me say I have no dog in this fight, as I am not from Arizona. Moreover, I am a Democrat.

If Jon Kyl had been smart, he would have made the effective date of his resignation before Kyrsten Sinema's inauguration, thus making McSally the Senior Senator.

But since that didn't happen, both Senators should be Co-Senior Senators. Both were inaugurated on the same day, for the new Congress. It doesn't matter Sinema was sworn in a few minutes before McSally, as everyone can't be sworn in at once.

I believe in fairness, even though this hurts my party.

[Deelighted]

McSally ran for the seat and was defeated by Sinema. McSally is only a senator from being appointed.

[JGMotorsport64]

McSally lost. She’s lucky she’s a junior senator

[milkit]

Originally Posted by Deelighted

McSally ran for the seat and was defeated by Sinema. McSally is only a senator from being appointed.

But both are valid ways t become US Senators. They became Senators at the same time (whe they were sworn in). I am interested only in fairness.

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

McSally lost. She’s lucky she’s a junior senator

Agreed with that.

[MsVulcan500]

Originally Posted by milkit

But both are valid ways t become US Senators. They became Senators at the same time (whe they were sworn in). I am interested only in fairness.

The fairness is that Sinema was elected by the people of AZ. We chose to have Sinema represent us. McSally was appointed due to a vacancy. She was not chosen by the people she represents. Republican governor Ducey said this was why Sinema would be sworn in first and be senior senator. She was chosen by the people.

[wase4711]

the state has 2 senators, that need to keep the state growing and thriving, and help the country get back on track; why would anyone care who is the senior senator or junior senator??

[veritased]

It's not like McSally got 0 votes... while Sinema won that Senate contest by a clear margin, it was tight up until the final counts, and the facts are that McSally does represent almost half the people in the state, just based on the votes.

[new2colo]

Originally Posted by milkit

First, of, let me say I have no dog in this fight, as I am not from Arizona. Moreover, I am a Democrat.

If Jon Kyl had been smart, he would have made the effective date of his resignation before Kyrsten Sinema's inauguration, thus making McSally the Senior Senator.

But since that didn't happen, both Senators should be Co-Senior Senators. Both were inaugurated on the same day, for the new Congress. It doesn't matter Sinema was sworn in a few minutes before McSally, as everyone can't be sworn in at once.

I believe in fairness, even though this hurts my party.

If you were a Democrat, you wouldn't have said anything that you do in your OP. The people of Arizona elected Synema. Why should the senator who was selected and not elected become the state's senior senator? Additionally, why do you think senators should hand their seats over instead of letting their constituents elect their replacement in a democratic process?

It sounds like you are a McSally supporter who is still bitter that she lost.

[Roadwarriors79]

McSally is lucky to be a US Senator today. If she wasn't in office now, another Republican was going to be appointed. It's up to McSally to keep that seat in the next special election (coming up in 2020).

[KurtAZ]

Originally Posted by milkit

First, of, let me say I have no dog in this fight, as I am not from Arizona. Moreover, I am a Democrat.

If Jon Kyl had been smart, he would have made the effective date of his resignation before Kyrsten Sinema's inauguration, thus making McSally the Senior Senator.

But since that didn't happen, both Senators should be Co-Senior Senators. Both were inaugurated on the same day, for the new Congress. It doesn't matter Sinema was sworn in a few minutes before McSally, as everyone can't be sworn in at once.

I believe in fairness, even though this hurts my party.

BTW...Senators and Representatives aren't really "inaugurated" regardless of what AOC may think. Sworn-in...yes...by pure definition I suppose you could call that an inauguration but it is not typically referred to in that way.