Once again, the U.S. has inexcusably trivialized its government by suddenly reverting to the principles of a hereditary monarchy. This tendency is deeply embedded apparently, and the Adams, Harrison, Bush and, of course Kennedy families have taken full, indeed excessive, advantage of it. Why do we let them? Because, unfortunately, the American public is largely too lazy, reflexive and dumb to operate a republic competently, as we are reminded every day.
Rushing to let a female relative replace a dead member of Congress or a governor, as so many have in our history, is particularly foolish. Historians and others have tried to mitigate the stupidity by emphasizing that this was one of the most effective ways for women to get political power in the U.S. when they were largely unrepresented. That is like saying women becoming Senators, House member and state governors through cooking competitions makes cooking competitions a good way to select leaders. Diane Kincaid, a political scientist who studied the topic in the 1970s, wrote, “statistically, at least, for women aspiring to serve in Congress, the best husband has been a dead husband.” Twenty-five years later, scholarsLisa Solowiej and Thomas L. Brunell concurred that it “is arguably the single most important historical method for women to enter Congress.”
Forty women became members of the House of Representatives as successors to their dead husbands, with only one doing it by election with her husband still alive, Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI). Widows were appointed to succeed their dead U.S. Senator husbands in 1931, 1936, 1948, twice in 1978, 1992, and 2001. Neither party is the greater offender: both have done it too many times, and once was too many. It doesn’t make the tradition more tolerable or ethical that now and then the female family member turned out to be reasonably competent: that’s moral luck. A U.S. Senator chosen by throwing an egg into a crowd might also turn out to be good one. It doesn’t make throwing eggs a responsible way to pick members of Congress.
Just three women have taken over the state house from their husbands. I guess people take the post of governor a bit more seriously.
Until today, however, just being the sister or brother of a dead member of Congress has never been a ticket to the halls of power. All of this is preface to stating here that the appointment of the late Senator Lindsey Davis’s sister Darline to replace him is indefensibly lazy, foolish, irresponsible and unethical. Here is how our ethics-savvy President broached the topic on Truth Social:
Ethics Alarms 
I completely agree.
Ben Franklin was never more savagely correct with “a republic if you can keep it”….
Some would see no evidence of graduating from an institution of higher learning as a badge of honor…
Lindsey Graham had just won his primary last month…so he was up for re-election. I don’t know anything about South Carolina politics, but Mark Lynch scored a pretty strong second place in the primary with almost 30% of the vote (everyone else was in single digits).
It would make much more sense to me if the sister was allowed to serve out the six months remaining on his term, but have Lynch replace Graham on the November ballot. I could live with that. Is Ms. Nordone simply serving out his term or does she take his spot on the ballot as well?
Just a placeholder. It’s still absurd.
This might help. It was posted Monday at New Neo: [The source is a SC TV news outlet.]
“Before her appointment, Nordone worked with the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation Department and has served as Commissioner of the South Carolina Commission for the Blind since 2019.
“Nordone, a resident of Lexington, serves on the SC State Workforce Development Board and is the president-elect of the National Council of State Agencies for the Blind. She has a Bachelor of Arts in Sociology from the College of Charleston, a Master of Arts in Rehabilitation Counseling, and is a Certified Public Manager.”
The earlier comment questioning the actual benefit of “graduating from an institute of higher learning” is noted and agreed with.
I saw mention elsewhere that there will be a “snap primary” in August to choose the Republican candidate for November. It is unknown at this time if Ms Nordone will toss her hat into that ring. At this point she is a place holder, one that is believed to be a reliable DJT vote.
We shall see.
That does help. Thanks for finding it: I tried several search engines and two bots to get her educational credentials. I’m updating the post.
While you are absolutely correct that choosing a replacement based on familial love is absurd, Nrs. Nordone is not completely lacking education and experience. Her qualifications are at least as valid as Barack Obama’s were. Still, it would have been more savvy to appoint the Republican who has a chance to win the upcoming election.
I mean, someone has to get picked. Odds are its going to be someone the governor knows personally and can vouch for their politics. By pure mathematics, family members of sitting politicians are already going to be wildly over represented in the pool of people a governor knows more intimately. If the family member is a fairly known constant of alignment with the governor, then even more so.
At the end of the day a governor is going to choose someone who aligns politically with the governor and regardless of who that governor chooses, there will always be angles of attack to claim the selectee is some sort of inappropriate political appointee.
I think this is “ick”, not ethics. Amend the constitution to require automatic snap elections or something.