As the swearing-in day for Congress approaches, we have an unusual number of vacancies in the Senate that require gubernatorial appointments:

• IL: President-elect Obama's open seat is supposed to be filled by Gov. Blagojevich, but U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald overheard some explosive phone conversations while listening for other crimes
• DE: Vice President-elect Biden's open seat is being filled by a 2-year placeholder until Biden's son Beau completes a tour of duty in Iraq
• NY: Secretary of State-nominee Clinton's open seat is coveted by America's semi-official princess, Caroline Kennedy
• CO: Secretary of Interior-nominee Salazar's open seat was just filled by Gov. Bill Ritter, who appointed Michael Bennet

In their own way, each of these vacancies presents another reason why the Senate should be abolished.

• IL has turned into a fiasco. Blagojevich refuses to go down without a fight and picked a black man so his ally Bobby Rush could dare the Senate to reject him and antagonize black voters.
• DE is treating its Senate seat as the personal property of the Biden family. That's how Aristocracies work, not Democracies.
• NY is treating its Senate seat as the personal property of the Kennedy family. Ditto.
• CO looks like Aristocracy as well, according to David Sirota:

In terms of politics (ie. ability to get reelected in 2010, ability to lift the statewide ticket in 2010, etc.), Bennet makes no sense for reasons that are undeniable: He's A) never run for any office in his life B) never run for - or even held by appointment - a statewide office in Colorado and C) lived in the state of Colorado for barely a decade...

the only thing that rationally explains his appointment is the emboldened power of political aristocracy (and, by extension, money) that is sweeping the country. By aristocracy, I mean all of the factors of aristocracy implied in its dictionary definition's focus on priviledge. That means not just familial lineage - but also money, inside connections and academic/economic advantage.

Why exactly are Democrats making the Senate more aristocratic?

I think it's because Democratic leaders have no core set of principles or beliefs, so it's easier to appoint scions of respected families than choose the "best" Democrat on policy grounds.

Why don't Democrats have core beliefs? Because every Democrat is elected as an individual entrepreneur, rather than someone who has worked his way up the party structure through accomplishments.

The Republican Party, which claims to be pro-entrepreneurial, is a top-down corporate party - all the power and money comes down from the top. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is completely entrepreneurial - anyone can launch a campaign and compete. That's exactly how a little-known Senator named Barack Obama became the Democratic nominee for President.

But when Democratic Senate seats are vacant, entrepreneurs need not apply - only Aristocrats.

Update 1: dday wants a Constitutional Amendment requiring special elections for Senate vacancies, and Chris Bowers agrees. But if we're going to go through the trouble of a Constitutional Amendment, let's just abolish the Senate instead.