For fans of soap opera and for admirers of Hamlet, New York Gov. David Paterson's prolonged and very public bout of indecision over his choice to fill Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's seat must have been pure pleasure.

Once Clinton resigned her seat to take on the role of secretary of state, would Paterson name Caroline Kennedy? Would he go for her former cousin-in-law, Andrew Cuomo? Would the nasty divorce between Cuomo and Kerry Kennedy have any bearing on Paterson's choice? What about that nice girl from Long Island, you know, or that ambitious harridan from upstate?

For those who cared about democracy, though, Paterson's prevaricating and preening before the reporters who hounded him over the last month was not so amusing.

A decision that normally rests in the hands of voters was now in the hands of a politician with something to gain or lose by his choice. The election was no longer about the people of New York state, but instead about the political fortunes of David Paterson, of his Democratic party, of those with whom he had rivalries and those whose interests he wanted to promote.

Paterson did not try to sell the seat for specific advantages, as did his Illinois gubernatorial colleague, Rod Blagojevich. The Illinois governor was arrested for trying to sell the Senate seat being vacated by Barack Obama in exchange for campaign contributions, a post in the Obama administration, a lucrative job for his wife or for himself. About the only thing Blagojevich didn't try to sell were fixtures in the Illinois Statehouse -- at least we don't believe so.

And over in Delaware, that state's Democratic governor, Jack Markell, named a replacement for outgoing Sen. Joseph Biden who's widely perceived to be a place-holder until Biden's son returns from a stint in Iraq to lay claim to his family's ancestral Senate seat. Indeed, Markell's pick, Biden's longtime chief of staff Edward Kaufman, already has announced he would not run for a full term.

What's wrong with this picture? We mean, besides the political calculation, the alleged selling-of-a-seat, the bad-faith appointment of a stand-in who has no long-term interest in representing the state?

All three of these situations are anti-democratic.

Which is why we were so pleased to see that Sen. Bill Diamond, D-Windham, has been joined by a bipartisan group of lawmakers in proposing a bill that would require that all vacated Maine seats in the U.S. Senate be filled by a special election within 60 days of that vacancy.

Right now, the U.S. Constitution requires that all vacated House seats be filled by special election, but Senate seats can be filled by appointment. And that takes power away from the people and invests it in the hands of those with considerations that may run counter to the public interest. Or considerations that, at the very least, are self-serving.

We know, we know: Voters can elect someone who will serve them poorly as well. But it's the voters who make that choice and that has been the story of democracy for eons. We're more than content to live with a bad choice made via the ballot; it's the bad choice that's shoved down our throat that, well, sticks in our craw.

Diamond's bill deserves approval and we hope that the other handful of states in the Union that still allow governors to appoint senators will see the light and follow suit.