Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Stand Up, Senator

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:35 PM
Original message
Stand Up, Senator
This is rough; please do not forward until I post a link to the final (8pm-ish EST). Thanks.

===

Hope is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense regardless of how it turns out.

- Vaclav Havel

Four years ago, members of the Congressional Black Caucus ran deliberately and vociferously into a brick wall when they chose to stand and protest the deplorable election calamity in Florida. They sought the name of one Senator, just one, which they could append to their complaints. Had they gotten that one name, a debate and discussion on what happened in Florida would have taken place in the House and the Senate. No Senator came forward, and the debate never happened.

Now, four years later, another election has come and gone. Now, four years later, there are rafts of evidence which point, once again, to overwhelming disenfranchisement of minority voters. Now, four years later, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, along with several other House members, plan to stand once again and protest an election that failed to live up to the standards required of participatory democracy. Now, four years later, they seek a Senator to stand with them.

This time, a Senator must answer the call.

Four years ago, standing up was politically dangerous. The country had just endured a month of mayhem and charges and countercharges and overheated rhetoric. The Supreme Court had ruled, a judicial version of the loud voice from Mount Ararat that cannot be contravened. The tablets had been handed down.

The mainstream news media had launched into the soothing refrain, This is an orderly transition of powerthis is an orderly transition of power, and a Senator standing up in Congress to swat the hornets nest again would have, bluntly, gotten their butt kicked up between their shoulderblades. Recall the line from the film The Right Stuff: It takes a special kind of man to volunteer for a suicide mission, especially one thats on TV. Four years ago, no one was feeling special enough to volunteer. Do not forget, as well, that candidate Gore asked his Senate colleagues not to join the CBC, so that they all might heal the country.

The politics this time around are comparably dicey. Mainstream media coverage of election irregularities in Ohio and elsewhere has been meager at best. What coverage there has been has managed to be simultaneously disparaging and uninformed. Take, for example, the editorial from the Cleveland Plain-Dealer directed today at Rep. Tubbs-Jones and Rev. Jesse Jackson: (Kerry) had the good grace and sense to acknowledge the abundantly obvious, go home and resume his life. You might consider emulating his excellent example, because what you are doing now - redoubling your effort in the face of a settled outcome - will only drive you further toward the political fringe. And that long grass already is tickling your knees.

A Senator who stands with Conyers and the CBC risks marginalization. A Senator who stands with Conyers risks blowing their credibility to smithereens on the eve of a fight over Bushs wacky judicial nominations, and on the eve of a fight over the very existence of the minoritys ability to filibuster. A Senator who stands with Conyers and the CBC risks being targeted for defeat by an increasingly effective GOP machine.

The difference this time around, however, cannot be overstated, and is the reason why a Senator must step forward. Four years ago, the argument was about replacing Bush with Gore. This time, despite the earnest desires of millions of people, such an option is not on the table. The process itself, barring another edict from Ararat, precludes the notion that someone besides Bush will take the oath on January 20th. If Conyers and company stand and object with the support of a Senator, the Electoral College hearing will adjourn, and both the House and Senate will hear two hours of testimony on the reasons behind the objection. After the testimony, the House and Senate will have a straight up-or-down vote on whether to entertain the objection. Given the GOP dominance in both chambers, the outcome of such a vote is preordained.

Even if, by some miracle, both chambers vote to uphold the objections based on the merits of the testimony, and Ohios 20 votes are removed from the Electoral College count, the waters beyond are muddy. The constitution is vague as to whether the 270 Electoral College threshold is an absolute, or whether the candidate with the most Electoral College votes is to be declared the winner, regardless of whether or not that 270-vote line is crossed. Bush would still lead Kerry 266 to 252 if Ohio were subtracted, and in all likelihood, would carry the day with that lead.

The difference this time politically for any Senator who stands up is that this fight is not about and must not be about replacing Bush with Kerry. This is about making sure that the greatest democracy in the history of the world lives up to that title. Rev. Jesse Jackson put it best when he said, If America is to be a champion of democracy abroad, it must clean up its elections at home. If it is to complain of fraudulent and dishonest election practices abroad, it cannot condone them at home. But more important, if our own elections are to be legitimate, then they must be honest, open, with high national standards.

A Senator must stand up with Conyers and open the door to testimony on this election in both chambers of Congress. A Senator must stand up so a national dialogue on how we run elections is created and carried forward. That dialogue must include:

* The fact that Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell engineered a series of outlandish maneuvers designed to deny citizens the ability to vote before and during the election, including junking vast numbers of new voter applications because they were not on postcard-weight paper, by making sure that heavily Democratic and minority voting districts did not have enough voting machines to accommodate the number of voters who came out, and by revoking access to public records of the election to citizens attempting to lawfully audit the poll books;

* The fact that Warren County election officials shuttered the public counting of votes based upon their claim that the FBI warned that terrorists were coming to attack them. No FBI agent anywhere on the planet has acknowledged issuing this warning, and the ballots in Warren County were subsequently left unguarded and unprotected;

* The fact that a county in Ohio shows more votes than registered voters; the fact that another Ohio county shows an underfunded Democratic State Supreme Court candidate getting more votes than an incredibly-funded Democratic presidential candidate; the fact that one machine alone in one county gave Bush 3,893 more votes than he actually got; the fact that another county registered an unheard-of 98% turnout rate, and that county subsequently handed Bush 19,000 extra votes; the fact that in another county, at least 25 voting machines transferred an unknown number of Kerry votes to Bush.

This list goes on, and on, and on.

Protecting the right to vote is not and must not be a partisan issue in this country. The fact that candidates of both parties too often acquiesce to the so-called Nixon Rule on elections a tacit agreement not to argue the outcome of questionable elections, which came about after the riddled-with-inconsistencies 1960 presidential race means that people who do violate the public trust by violating the sanctity of the ballot are safe from censure, especially if their actions lead to a victory.

In a perfect world, all 100 Senators would stand up because of one simple fact: They are where they are because of the vote, and if they do not protect that vote, it may be them looking at the short end of the stick come some future election day. All 100 should stand, but it only takes one. It only takes one to move us closer to that more perfect union, where every vote counts and every vote is counted, where the citizenry can trust that the people leading them were properly chosen, where partisans acting in the dark of night to thwart that simple, admirable goal are exposed and purged from our system.

Stand up, Senator. Stand up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
yinkaafrica Donating Member (535 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. So this IS a nail biter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Good draft, Will
Are you sending this to all senators or just posting it on your blog?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Main TO, blog, here
If people want to send it to their Senators, I won't stop them. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pam-Moby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. Thanks Will, your great. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Verve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
43. Great job Will! I'm biting my nails with ya! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meganmonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. Oooohhh! I got chills!
Well done Will!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaulVB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Excellent, Will
Once again, well said!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldtime dfl_er Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Will, this is excellent
I don't know if this is the direction you want to go, but there ARE plusses to a senator standing up. A senator who lives in a solidly blue state will only become more popular for this act of courage. And history - yes, history, if we don't blow ourselves to smithereens in the next four years -- will remember the bold, the courageous, the patriotic ONE who performs this act. History will not remember nor reward the meek.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eye_on_prize Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. Will, what do you make of the machinations re: rule changes today on Cspan

SEE
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
AND
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

How doest all this effect the Jan 6th challenge, if at all? i.e. will rule changes take effect immediately, and therefore be in force Jan6? if so, how will this effect Conyers ability to carry this fwd? do you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Neither of those links work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eye_on_prize Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
24. ok ... trying it again.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=232700&mesg_id=232700

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1119054

They are about these rule changes that just passed apparently...
esp. the 'Homeland Security .." one, and
"restoration of presumption of innocence.." ie the '45 day' thing..



SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY OF H.RES. 5
ADOPTING HOUSE RULES FOR THE 109TH CONGRESS
Tuesday, January 4, 2005


Section 1. Resolved Clause.

The rules of the House of Representatives for the 108th Congress are adopted as the rules of the House for the 109th Congress with amendments as provided in section 2 and with other orders as provided in section 3.

Section 2. Changes in Standing Rules.

(a)Committee on Homeland Security. Creates a standing Committee on Homeland Security, and grants it legislative and oversight jurisdiction. First, the Committee's jurisdiction includes overall homeland security policy so that it can focus on national policies affecting the Federal government. Second, the jurisdiction includes authority over the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)'s internal administration. Third, the Committee would have jurisdiction over functions of the DHS relating to six specified areas. These include: (A) Border and port security (except immigration policy and non-border enforcement); (B) Customs (except customs revenue); (C) Integration, analysis and dissemination of homeland security information; (D) Domestic preparedness for and collective response to terrorism; (E) Research and development; and (F) Transportation security. Additionally, the Committee would have broad oversight authority over government-wide homeland security matters. Finally, changes are made to the jurisdictions of three committees. First, the Committee on the Judiciary's jurisdiction is modified by adding new subparagraphs for Criminal law enforcement and Immigration policy and non-border enforcement. Second, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's jurisdiction is modified to exclude transportation security by adding exceptions in two subparagraphs. Third, the Committee on Ways and Mean's jurisdiction is modified by adding the word "revenue" to the clause containing customs.

(b)General oversight responsibilities - insuring against duplicative programs. Adds to the required list of content included in each standing committee's adopted oversight plan as submitted to the Committees on Government Reform and House Administration a review of Federal programs with a view to insuring against duplication of such programs.

(c)(1)Membership of Budget Committee. Permits one member of the Budget committee majority and one member of the minority to be "designated" by the respective elected leaderships. Current rules require such members to be "from" elected leadership.

(c)(2) Rules Committee Organization. Authorizes the chairman of the Committee on Rules to serve as chairman, notwithstanding the prohibition on serving more than three consecutive terms.

(d)(1)Privileged motions in committee - Recess subject to the call of the chair. Allows for a privileged motion in committee to recess subject to the call of the chair for a period less than 24 hours. Currently only a motion to recess from day to day is privileged.

(d)(2)Motion to go to conference. Allows committees to adopt a rule directing the chairman of the committee to offer a privileged motion to go to conference at any time the chairman deems it appropriate during a Congress. Currently a motion to request or agree to a conference with the Senate is privileged if the committee authorizes the chairman to make such a motion.

(e)Motion to suspend the rules. Extends suspension authority beyond Monday or Tuesday to include Wednesday.

(f)Repeal of Corrections Calendar. Removes Corrections Calendar from the Standing Rules of the House.

(g)Allows references to the Senate. Allows remarks in debate to include references to the Senate or its Members. Remarks are to be confined to the question under debate, avoiding personality.

(h)Provisional quorum. Provides for continuity of legislative operations in the House in the event of catastrophic circumstances. The rule allows for the House to conduct business with a provisional quorum only after a motion to compel members attendance, as prescribed under clause 5(a) of rule XX, has been disposed of and the following occur in sequence without the House adjourning: (A) A call of the House or a series of calls of the House totaling 72 hours without producing a quorum; (B) the Speaker, with the Minority and Majority Leaders, receive from the Sergeant-at-Arms (or his designee) a catastrophic quorum failure report and shall consult with the Minority and Majority Leaders on the contents of such report and shall announce the contents of such report to the House; and (C) A further call of the House or series of calls are conducted for a total of 24 hours without producing a quorum. A catastrophic quorum failure report is defined as a report advising that the inability of the House to establish a quorum is attributable to catastrophic circumstances involving natural disaster, attack, contagion, or similar calamity rendering Members incapable of being present. The report shall be prepared on the basis of the most authoritative information available after consultation with the Attending Physician, the Clerk and pertinent public heath and law enforcement officials. A catastrophic quorum failure report shall describe the number of vacancies in the House, the names of Members considered to be incapacitated, the names of Members not incapacitated, but otherwise incapable of being present, and the names of Members unaccounted for. The report shall be updated every legislative day and such updates shall be made available to the House.

(i)Postponement of certain votes. Adds the motion to reconsider, tabling motions to reconsider and amendments reported from the Committee of the Whole among those votes the Speaker may postpone to a designated place in the legislative schedule within two additional legislative days.

(j)(1) - (2)Allowing the use of campaign funds to pay for certain official expenses. Allows Members to use campaign funds to pay certain, limited types of official expenses (e.g., handheld communication devices). This change conforms House Rules to current law (Sec. 105, P.L. 108-83), and mirrors Rules that took effect in the Senate in 2002.

(j)(3)Use of frank for mass mailings before an election. Amends the rule to conform to section 3210 of title 39 United States Code, stating that a mass mailing is not frankable when it is postmarked less than 90 days before the date of a primary or general election which he is a candidate for public office. Currently the rule states 60 days.

(j)(4)Gift rule on officially connected travel. Expands the category of individuals who may accompany a Member or staff person on such a trip at the sponsor's expense to include a relative of the Member or the staff person. Under a provision of the current gift rule (clause 5(b)(4)(D) of House Rule XXV), a Member or staff person may be accompanied on a privately funded, officially connected trip, at the sponsor's expense, only by either his or her "spouse or a child", and not by any other relative.

(k)(1)Due process for Members. Affords Members the opportunity to be heard in the event the Standards Committee alleges the Member has violated or may have violated the Code of Conduct. Members may opt for either an adjudicatory proceeding or they can submit a response to the Committee report/letter with their response being made public with Committee report/letter. Under the current rule, the Chairman and Ranking Member, or the Committee, may take action against a Member without a complaint, notice, or the opportunity to be heard.

(k)(2)Restore presumption of innocence. Provides that no action will be taken on a complaint unless the Chairman and Ranking Minority member of the Standards Committee, or the Committee itself, find within 45 days that further investigation is merited by the facts of the complaint, maintaining the presumption of innocence. Currently, if the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member take no action on a properly filed complaint within 45 days, the matter automatically goes to an investigative committee.

(k)(3)Right to counsel. Provides that Members may select a counsel of their choice even if that counsel represents other Members.

(l) Technical and codifying changes. Technical and grammatical changes are made throughout the rules of the House.

Section 3. Separate Orders.

(a)(1) - (a)(3)Continuation of budget enforcement mechanisms from the 108th. Clarifies that section 306 of the Budget Act (prohibiting consideration of legislation within the Budget Committee's jurisdiction, unless reported by the Budget Committee) only applies to bills and joint resolutions and not to simple or concurrent resolutions. It also makes a section 303 point of order (requiring adoption of budget resolution before consideration of budget-related legislation) applicable to text made in order as an original bill by a special rule. Specified or minimum levels of compensation for federal office will not be considered as providing new entitlement authority.

(a)(4)Continuation of budget deeming resolution from the 2nd Session of the 108th Congress. Establishes that the provisions of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 95 of the 108th Congress, shall have effect in the 109th Congress until such time as a budget resolution for the fiscal year 2005 is adopted.

(b)Extra subcommittees for Armed Services, International Relations, and Transportation & Infrastructure. A waiver of Rule X, clause 5(d), is granted for Armed Services and Transportation & Infrastructure for 6 subcommittees, and International Relations for 7 subcommittees in the 109th Congress.

(c) Numbering of bills. In the 109th Congress, the first 10 numbers for bills (H.R. 1 through H.R. 10) shall be reserved for assignment by the Speaker to such bills as he may designate when introduced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eye_on_prize Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. here are two germain sections - if rule chg. passed as proposed - how do
these effect Jan 6th challenge, if at all? maybe they don't effect it at all but wanted to ask, since the tone of these actions seems at least partially designed to

(h)Provisional quorum. Provides for continuity of legislative operations in the House in the event of catastrophic circumstances. The rule allows for the House to conduct business with a provisional quorum only after a motion to compel members attendance, as prescribed under clause 5(a) of rule XX, has been disposed of and the following occur in sequence without the House adjourning: (A) A call of the House or a series of calls of the House totaling 72 hours without producing a quorum; (B) the Speaker, with the Minority and Majority Leaders, receive from the Sergeant-at-Arms (or his designee) a catastrophic quorum failure report and shall consult with the Minority and Majority Leaders on the contents of such report and shall announce the contents of such report to the House; and (C) A further call of the House or series of calls are conducted for a total of 24 hours without producing a quorum. A catastrophic quorum failure report is defined as a report advising that the inability of the House to establish a quorum is attributable to catastrophic circumstances involving natural disaster, attack, contagion, or similar calamity rendering Members incapable of being present. The report shall be prepared on the basis of the most authoritative information available after consultation with the Attending Physician, the Clerk and pertinent public heath and law enforcement officials. A catastrophic quorum failure report shall describe the number of vacancies in the House, the names of Members considered to be incapacitated, the names of Members not incapacitated, but otherwise incapable of being present, and the names of Members unaccounted for. The report shall be updated every legislative day and such updates shall be made available to the House.

(k)(2)Restore presumption of innocence. Provides that no action will be taken on a complaint unless the Chairman and Ranking Minority member of the Standards Committee, or the Committee itself, find within 45 days that further investigation is merited by the facts of the complaint, maintaining the presumption of innocence. Currently, if the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member take no action on a properly filed complaint within 45 days, the matter automatically goes to an investigative committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. Check your links...
You did a cut-and-paste of some long links from the original post.

To fix, edit your post and overwrite the links by right clicking on the original link, selecting "Copy Shortcut", and then pasting over the bad links.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eye_on_prize Donating Member (205 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
56. sorry, I'm a newbie, technophobe neo-Luddite who's still learning..
..the ropes and how to do stuff ..like precisely how does one 'overwrite links' and 'right clicking on original link', etc.

What i DID do was added a new post onto that sub-string with active links and with more detail about the nature of my question, but still haven't had anyone actually respond to my freekin question, except to say 'bad link' and then your message which mystified me with arcane technotalk. I DO appreciate that you were just trying to be helpful, don't get me wrong on that. I guess it just struck me as funny, as in haha, ironies of hating/loving technology in a way... anyway..

I'm running off the the Portland OR's election fraud organizing meeting now, but will check when I get back. If no one's responded cuz this is buried now, maybe I'll just do a starter/top/post for my questions and develop them better ...maybe I wasn't being as clear as I could be if I take more time with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whalerider55 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. will
this summarizes everything i believe about Election Day, and January 6th. Bravo. Bravo.

thank you. a terrific piece of writing, and stirring piece of advocacy. and heck, i liked it so darned much.

whalerider55
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. Great writing ,Will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kota Donating Member (658 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
10. Outstanding!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
11. nice piece . . . but all for naught, I fear . . .
won't be any senators standing up . . . because Kerry doesn't want them to . . . simple as that . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. He doesn't?
Where'd you hear that?

Great writing Will!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnfound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Predictable and ohhhh soooo constructive. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerry fan Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Has nothing to do with Kerry-NOT his to decide
IMO, it has to do with the survival of the democratic party versus the TOTAL takeover of the country by the republican party. Simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
12. You ARE the Dude of the Year to us too Will!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. Huzzah!
And well said.

Great job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
m.standridge Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. Just wish we had more in the way of "remedies"
This is a poor excuse for one--just not counting Ohio.

Bush still has more Electoral votes than Kerry, though not 270.

This is an interesting question, as to who would win in this circumstance, or whether the election could proceed.
Give GOP Congressional control, it seems a virtual certainty that an effort would be made to ensure the election of Bush went forward.

So, here could be another historical first for W. Bush:

First President to be elected without 270 Electoral votes.
That would go down, alongside:

First President who won in the Electoral College only, to ever be re-elected.
First President to be inaugurated with Approval ratings below 49%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
36. What if there is proof that Kerry actually won Ohio
then he should get the electorial votes. Then he wins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Garbo 2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #36
51. Tecnically that would require an alternate slate of electors approved
Edited on Tue Jan-04-05 08:08 PM by Garbo 2004
by the state to be submitted to Congress in time for Congressional certification. In the past, prior to completion of a recount but still within the deadlines for submission of electoral votes to Congress, a state has submitted two slates of electors' votes to Congress. I believe by the time Congress met to read the votes the winner of the state was decided by the recount so that slate of electors were accepted by Congress. Right now there is only one slate of Ohio electors' votes before Congress and those are for Bush.

And even if those votes are contested, if there is only one slate of electors' votes submitted to Congress and it isn't shown that they were not legally submitted by the state according to the state's procedures, Federal law states that Congress should accept the votes. Theoretically I suppose Congress could determine there are grounds for not counting those votes, but it's unlikely given "the Congress we have rather than the Congress we want."

In this case even if there were to be a full recount in Ohio which showed a Kerry win, it would be after Congress certified the votes already submitted to it. That would be another kettle of fish entirely.

Right now all there is are allegations and suspicions that the certified vote in Ohio is not a true representation of the all the legitimate votes cast. That doesn't constitute proof of a Kerry win in Ohio. Which is why some of us supported a full recount in Ohio which to date has not happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
m.standridge Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #51
62. But all the state can be "forced" to do is the 3% thing...
if I'm understanding this right. That is, they just have to look at 3% of the vote, to see if there's enough error to justify a full recount, including manual recounts.
Blackwell, some have alleged, "cherry picked" areas that would not be much different. Also, there are the issues of the TRIAD techs, and whether what they did altered the recount results.
But the bottom line seems to be, unless it's within some fraction of 1% (as to the difference in vote totals between the two candidates), which is supposed to trigger an "automatic" recount by the state, the state doesn't have to do a full recount if it doesn't want to, even if parties are willing to pay.

What the gray area is, if there is one, would be whether someone can be elected unless they have a full 270 Electoral votes, and how much leeway Congress might have to ok this. Or, if there's some further legal challenge the Dems could raise against such a Congressional action authorizing a 266 Electoral vote victory for Bush.

Correct me if I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
m.standridge Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. Actually, I've seen a couple of pretty imaginative scenarios
such as:
based on the fact that, in most states (and further reinforced by Federal law), the Electors are actually only required to vote for a member of the Popular vote winner's PARTY, NOT necessarily that individual him/herself.

Suppose, for instance, that the Arizona delegation decided to cast all its votes for Sen. John McCain (R. AZ) for President, instead of Bush?

They'd probably be within the law. That would put Bush at 266 (with Ohio not counted), minus 9 AZ Electoral votes more from Bush = 257 Bush, 251 Kerry, 1 Edwards, 9 McCain.

(I understand a MN Elector's vote has been cast for Edwards, D. NC).

And another "spicey" scenario, would be that, since more than one person is getting Electoral votes, if no one got 270, it'd be more complicated and less obviously legal to say someone had won. Could that lead to a "revote" scenario? Or could this lead to some shakeup as to who the VP is? Anyway, doesn't sound likely or real-world, but you never know, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PaganPreacher Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #23
69. Missed two out of three.
1. "First President to be elected without 270 Electoral votes."

Here's a partial list of Presidents who were elected without needing 270 Electoral votes:

Dwight David Eisenhower (1952)
Harry S. Truman (1948)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1932, 1936, 1940)
Herbert Hoover (1928)
....see a pattern?

2. "First President who won in the Electoral College only, to ever be re-elected."

All two term Presidents, plus our only three term President, "won in the Electoral College only," since the President has never been elected by any means other than the Electoral College.

The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaliTracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
19. excellent. thanks so much. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
21. The thing that REALLY sucks...
Is that it's very likely that if the election were conducted fairly, Kerry would have easily won. Knowing that, even if enough evidence is clearly presented and a Senator stands, the Repuke dominated houses (what a coincidence) will not acknowledged the challenge, and Bush, though probably NOT really the winner at all, still gets his way, AGAIN. They covered all their bases. Why would they not..if they were going to steal a tiny margin of victory for Bush in the Presidential election, you know they would have to pad that thievery with a little majority in the House and Senate.

Just in case the Dems noticed another fraudulent election and decided to stand up.

They left no stone unturned, I'll give em that.

They made sure it was foolproof.

Our entire system is flawed. They should not be able to get away with this. It makes no sense to let this Repub heavy group decide the outcome AGAIN. It's like letting Zarqawi decide Bin Laden's fate...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerry fan Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. BTW Will...excellent piece...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
30. Oh, ALRIGHT!
Sorry, Will.

Of course it was an excellent piece. As usual. You da man.

I occasionally forget myself when I am filled with youthful indignation, and my fierce sense of justice is busting forth.

Luckily, there are always people like KerryFan to give me a hard time, and kick my ass into check.

Because any Kerry Fan is a friend of mine, I can forgive it. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerry fan Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. OMG Vektor
I do not mean to kick ass...lol...Was not directing at you in particular. All of you are doing a far better job than I could ever hope to do. I am elderly and disabled and not real great on the puter and discussion boards. That's why I don't post much. But, I read A LOT. Sometimes my daughter helps me.

Believe me, I would give everything I own to see Kerry replace Bush. I feel that Kerry is probably the most ethical and honest and able candidate either party has fielded in a very long time.

I just want us to all keep in mind there is something here far bigger than Kerry being elected, and I believe Kerry knows that and knows it is bigger than him. I don't mean this to be a downer because I have hope that there WILL be at least on senator who will help us. But, I just feel that democracy itself and the democratic itself are at stake here. And I can't help believing that Kerry and probably every other senator knows that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vektor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. No problem!
I think you are doing a wonderful job on the keyboard. The only reason I thought you were giving me a ribbing, is because the way you posted your comment, it came up as a reply to what I said last. You may have meant to reply to Will's post, but you replied to my rant about how the system sucks instead.

I thought you were teasing me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mohinoaklawnillinois Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
25. Will, another terrific piece written by you.
I hope you realize that you're my hero.

Can't wait to follow your blog on Thursday.

:loveya: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Gigmeister Donating Member (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
26. Will...Just one question, please?
If all the above information is factual as you say, where is Senator Kerry? Afterall, who's got more to lose than him? He's worked for this all his life.

Are you of the opinion that he doesn't know as much as you, or did he throw the election?

I don't see how there could be another choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShinerTX Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
27. Not so fast...
Even if, by some miracle, both chambers vote to uphold the objections based on the merits of the testimony, and Ohios 20 votes are removed from the Electoral College count...


Wouldn't this solution ultimately be a defeat for our cause? We can't settle for OH just being thrown out--that means EVERY Ohio voter's vote doesn't count, not just the poor and black ones.

We have to fight for either the results to be reversed to that the real result is made known, or we have to fight for a revote in Ohio. If we just throw Ohio out--even if that makes Kerry President--then we everything that we've been saying about counting every vote correctly for the past month will have been a lie.

I want a revote, a recount, and a redo on this election!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smoochie Donating Member (65 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #27
67. Excellent point ShinerTX!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
28. Excellent as is!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bear425 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
29. Good job, Will Pitt. I spent all day on the phone calling
our Senators. Hopefully, we will see them stand...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
32. Excellent, as always, Will -- one suggestion.
Instead of "This list goes on, and on, and on" -- you might consider something like "I can expand this list not just with incidents in Ohio, but also in Florida, New Mexico, Texas and others."

I think it important, in your plea, to do as you do and present several specific examples from Ohio, but to also indicate that 10s of thousands of incidents were reported throughout the Nation and more are going to be uncovered (as several of us have been doing in WA State, for instance).

Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #32
49. I second the motion. Excellent suggestion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laura PourMeADrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
33. Excellent! Do you know if Conyers has put together that "booklet"
of all the fraud documentation? I remember reading he was trying to do that before the 6th and distribute to each member....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
34. How about Lincoln's quote?
"To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men."
Abe Lincoln
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kerry fan Donating Member (351 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. Whew...I like that...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
35. Wonderful. Thanks,Will
These words will be remembered by us for a long time. I can only hope that the Senate will really hear what is being expressed here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
37. One suggestion: "rafts of evidence" - maybe "reams" would be better?
Just a thought. Otherwise, fine piece.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlackVelvet04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
38. Quite sad when
doing the right thing is so unpopular. Had someone stood up in 2000 we might very well not have this mess today. We really shouldn't have to beg our senators to do the right thing for the country.

Great piece, Will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
40. Conyers, etal, need to contest the votes in LOTS of States!!!
The evidence of fraud goes far and wide in this election.

I agree w/ Post# 32 where Understandinglife was saying this same thing.

These things happened ALL OVER THE COUNTRY!! I hope Conyers doesn't limit himself to just Ohio!

:kick::kick::kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
42. Well said n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
45. ..."expose and purge"...
I love the sound of that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
46. "Fight for us, and regain your honor."
We are your constituents.

Fight for us, and we will hold your oaths FULFILLED.

(Naysayers: "You waste your time. They had no honor in 2001 and they have none now in 2005.")

Well...

What say you?



Hmmmm Senators? See that movie? How DO you want to act? Whom do you want to be compared to?


~FS, with "Lord of the Rings" on the brain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silver Gaia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:13 PM
Response to Original message
47. Oh Will...that was excellent...
You said so well what I also feel in my own mind and heart about this issue. I just read your draft aloud to my husband and we both had tears in our eyes by the time I finished. THIS is what it is really all about. Beautiful. Thank you so much for your dedication to our America. It is much appreciated in this corner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darknyte7 Donating Member (687 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
48. Very nice...
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdb Donating Member (398 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
50. From what I have read...
If both houses do agree, the objection stands and the disputed votes are not counted.

If after the objections dealt with, no candidate has a majority (now 270) of electoral votes, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution requires that the House and Senate must choose the president and vice president under a procedure formally called a "Contingent Election."

In the Contingent Election, the House chooses the president while the Senate chooses the vice president.

In the House, votes for president are cast by state, with each state getting one vote. A simple majority -- 26 states -- wins.

In the Senate, the vote for vice president is taken member-by-member. A majority -- 51 Senators -- wins.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa121600b.htm

http://sheridan_conlaw.typepad.com/sheridan_conlaw/election_primer_by_zimmer/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
52. Kick for Will! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
53. Link to final
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mirrera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. Forgive me...
I am sorry,
I found your article so true to heart unfinished, that I forwarded it to my list. Sometimes rough is ready... Good job articulating our common beat.
Maria
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. Love the finish on the rewrite! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
54. Will, I've been saying all day that Senator Boxer is standing up
based on your post last night. Is that true? I sure hope so, because if it is not, I have created a false impression among a lot of the Tennessee faithful and media. Is Boxer's decision to stand on 1/6 firm and final? Is any other Senator going to stand with her? (PM me if needed)

Believe me, I'm not stopping my email writing tonight and our rallies will happen tomorrow across the Orange State. But I would sleep better tonight (who am I kidding -- sleep! what a concept) knowing that the impression I got from your report out of San Fran last night still holds -- that Boxer has the biggest brain, heart and balls in the U.S. Senate right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #54
65. My post last night
repeated what I heard from David Lytel. I posted a clarification, both here and on the blog, that I was unable to confirm what Lytel said.

Be careful when you forward information that you want to be true. Make sure it is true before you do so. I never said flat-out that Boxer was standing up. I repeated what Lytel said to a packed room in Boston. There is a diference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #65
66. Maybe the same should be said about posting what you want to be true
before you confirm it. Your original post was pretty positive and I'm unable to stay in front of the computer 24/7 since we are doing other things to take our country back here in Tennessee. I sure hope that your first (hopeful, unconfirmed) post turns out to be accurate. But these days, even 24 hours of hope beats giving up. This morning, I'm not sure that either hope is here to stay or that help is on the way. But I'm not going to stop calling Senators and showing up to protest the election theft in front of our TN Senators' offices at noon today.

I can always start packing on Friday. Packing light -- without my voter registration card.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #66
68. First of all
I wasn't the one to make the post. It was made by another DUer who was at the rally, who dropped my name as having been there. If you do a search - always a good idea before you claim someone here said something they didn't, especially if you aren't able to be at your computer a lot - you will see that my information was based entirely upon reporting what Lytel said, and saying I would try to confirm it, and then saying I was unable to confirm it.

My blog entries on the matter, which reflect exactly what I posted here:

---

We have Senators?
Monday 03 January 2005 @ 09:10

I am told by David Lytel, who has been lobbying Senators to stand with Conyers, that Tubbs-Jones is actively considering standing up, and if she asks Senator Boxer to do the same, Boxer will stand as well.

I have no way to confirm this until tomorrow, but Lytel is giving me the phone numbers I will need to get that confirmation. He seems to think something will pop on this some time tomorrow. I will run this to ground with alacrity when the sun comes up.

---

Heading home
Monday 03 January 2005 @ 09:45

I am done here. Lytel gave me the numbers, and I will run the Tubbs-Jones story down in the morning.

---

Clarity
Tuesday 04 January 2005 @ 01:01

I cannot vouch for Mr. Lytel's version of things until I have spoken with these people myself. There may very well be nothing to this other than another source offering wishes as fact. When I attempted to pin him down absolutely on the matter I got a lot of if and then if and then if and then if...

I will run this dog to ground on Tuesday as best I can. In the meantime, if you are one living and dying with every passing page of this tale, hold the celebrations. This needs to be confirmed.

And one last bit, in the form of an apology: I was blogging tonight at this protest on a device about the size of a pack of cigarettes, and everyone was yelling Senator this and Senator that...and I posted something about 'Senator' Tubbs-Jones...who is, of course, a Congresswoman. Somewhere in the zoo I garbled the report that if Rep. Tubbs-Jones steps forth, Senator Boxer will come along for the ride. My sincere apologies for any confusion.

Let's...be careful out there.

---

Re: Tubbs-Jones and Boxer
Tuesday 04 January 2005 @ 11:11

After a series of telephone calls, the aforementioned story regarding Tubbs-Jones and Boxer stands just about where you'd figure. Senator Boxer is definitely considering offering a challenge to the Electors. If she actually decides to do so, however, she won't break cover until Thursday. That is, frankly, wise. To do otherwise would be calling down the thunder on herself and her staffers.

I couldn't get anyone to go on the record to confirm Lytel's statement that Rep. Tubbs-Jones can get Boxer to stand up just by asking her to do so. At the end of things here, Lytel's claim last night (which I am told he has repeated to a number of other blogs) is just going to hang out there in space until it is proven true or false.

Running in circles is fun. Please return to gnawing.

http://www.truthout.org/fyi

Again, the search function is your friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. Fortunately, this discussion is moot now with six Senators and counting
and as a poor farmer two months behind on my farm payments, I have not made a contribution to DU. Thus, I am unable to use the search function (at least when I tried before).

So that you can see what we're doing when not in front of a computer, visit this link: http://www.tnimc.org/feature/display/4027/index.php

I'm glad neither one of us is lamenting losing a single Senator (Boxer) who was being rumored just two days ago as our only hope. Now I don't want to be satisfied with six, I want 20+.

Call/fax/write. Repeat. Call/fax/write. Repeat.

It will be a long but a heartwarming night for democracy here in my Tennessee holler. Peace, out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laurab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
57. Very well said
And pretty much says it all. I wonder too, as someone already posted, why we have to beg our senators to do the right thing. Since it seems we do, that's a pretty concise, well-written article on why it IS the right thing. Thanks, Will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
floridadem30 Donating Member (525 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
58. That was a good draft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GetTheRightVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
60. Thank you for the posting and the article, Yes, Stand Up Senator
as we have stood up for you by putting you into office.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
61. This is pure genius!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
64. Still kickin' n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Oct 23rd 2021, 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC