Posted on 11/10/2008 6:30:13 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Reader Jason wrote to Electoral college requesting Obama's birth certificate records be released. Jason wrote, "I emailed the Electoral College and submitted all the information from the We The People petition and ad- so they can be aware of their duty before electing this man into what will be our utmost undoing."
They answered and punked out.
The Office of the Federal Register at the National Archives and Records Administration administers the Electoral College process, which takes place after the November general election. The Office of the Federal Register does not have the authority to handle issues related to the general election, such as candidate qualifications. People interested in this issue may wish to contact their state election officials or their Congressional Representatives.
Because the process of qualifying for the election and having a candidate's name put on the ballot varies from state to state, you should contact your state's top election officer for more information. In most states, the Secretary of State is the official responsible for oversight of state elections, including the presidential election. Visit the National Secretaries of State web site to locate contact information and web addresses for the Secretary of State from each state and the District of Columbia.
Under federal law an objection to a state's electoral votes may be made to the President of the Senate during Congress's counting of electoral votes in January. The objection must be made in writing and signed by at least one Senator and one member of the House of Representatives. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives debate the objection separately. Debate is limited to two hours. After the debate, both the Senate and the House of Representatives rejoin and both must agree to reject the votes.
Legal Affairs and Policy Staff Office of the Federal Register
The President of the Senate is Robert Byrd - good luck with that!
UPDATE: Slim guy advises: The people to contact are your party representatives at the state level. The leadership of your state Senate and House of your party and the Office of the Governor and Sec of State and possibly the AG. Methods of appointment of electors vary from state to state and also just how much control the government has over them once they are appointed. A little homework needed on your part to determine the best course of action in your case.
UPDATE: My bad... The current President pro tempore of the Senate is Robert Byrd --
According to wikipedia, Roark is right - the U.S. Constitution states the Vice President of the United States serves as President of the Senate, and is the highest-ranking official of the Senate even though he only votes in the case of a tie. CHENEY! How very Rovian .... talk about going out with a bang :)
Not a single GOP organization has stepped up to the plate. Pathetic.
This is so wrong. Obama is fighting this tooth and nail. That, to me, says he is hiding the truth and is guilty as charged.
Speaking of the Electoral College ... This may be a shot in the dark but what do any Freepers think of Sarah Palin getting an electoral vote from a disenchanted Republican elector for the way she’s been treated by the McCain people? Could it happen? If it did wouldn’t she be the first ever woman to get an electoral vote? John Edwards got a vote in 2004, Lloyd Bentson got one in 1988 and Ronald Reagan received one in 1976. It’s happened before. Does anyone think that it could happen again? Just a thought here ... Heck, it’s only trivial at this point and it would look good in her run-up to the 2012 Election.
"No controlling legal authority."
Apparently.
I cannot believe there is not one individual in this country who has the power to resolve this who won’t do the right thing.
Uh, guys the President of the Senate is Dick Cheney, the Vice President. Byrd may have been President Pro Temp.
And, of course, this office petitioned has no authority in such a matter.
Over the years, our cases have established that the irreducible constitutional minimum of standing contains three elements: First, the plaintiff must have suffered an "injury in fact"— an invasion of a legally-protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, see id., at 756, 104 S.Ct., at 3327; Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 508, 95 S.Ct. 2197, 2210, 45 L.Ed.2d 343 (1975); Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 740-741, n. 16, 92 S.Ct. 1361, 1368-1369, n. 16, 31 L.Ed.2d 636 (1972);1 and (b) "actual or imminent, not 'conjectural' or 'hypothetical,' " Whitmore, supra, 495 U.S., at 155, 110 S.Ct., at 1723 (quoting Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 1665, 75 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983)). Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of—the injury has to be "fairly . . . trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant, and not . . . th[e] result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court." Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. 26, 41-42, 96 S.Ct. 1917, 1926, 48 L.Ed.2d 450 (1976). Third, it must be "likely," as opposed to merely "speculative," that the injury will be "redressed by a favorable decision." Id., at 38, 43, 96 S.Ct., at 1924, 1926.
Unlike merely standing for election, the actual swearing in of a constitutionally unqualified candidate, I would think is a particularized injury to each and every citizen who granted limited powers to the government under the constitution, it is imminent, and it can be redressed by a favorable decision of the Supreme Court.
But, it will be interesting to see Scalia's take on this.
USC Article III: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution...
The constitutional qualification of a man to be president is a case under the US constitution.
It’s above their pay grade.
This case and some of these comments indicate people do not understand our Constitutional process. This likely cannot be adjudicated until the Congress meets to count the Electoral votes. It is up to Congress to decide on the matter from all I can see.
Individual citizens have no standing but Electors do. Electors elect the President not individual citizens who could constitutionally be entirely left out of presidential elections. It would be completely constitutional for a state/states to decide to select electors by a random process, a lottery.
Those electors must decide to vote for a qualified person and from what I can tell any vote for an unqualified person can be invalidated.
I agree. in addition, I reason, any citizen as a member of the class of persons, "We the People...", who entered into the agreement called the Constitution of the United States, should have standing to demand that someone running for any of the defined offices show proof of meeting the minimum qualifications. That should mean that you, I, or Berg should be able to have our day in court and that Barack Hussein Obama should come, certificate in hand, to prove to US that he meets those minimum qualifications.
Well,,,this ain’t good...:0(
We are in some sort of wide-spread collapse of social responsibility. It’s like a Dr Who episode. Only there’s no Dr. Who.
“No controlling legal authority.”
USC Article III: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution...
The constitutional qualification of a man to be president is a case under the US constitution.
***I’ve dealt with this in industry, when an unpleasant task has to land on someone and no matter how obvious it is that it belongs to some particular group, they say it belongs to someone else. In industry, these turf wars get elevated to the CEO level, who invariably rolls his eyes and tries to cut the baby in half. But this isn’t industry, and it could trigger a major constitutional crisis with the possibility of large scale civil “unrest & disobedience”.
I’m confused, how does one email the electoral college?
Nonsense. We all have standing. We have standing when someone breaks the rules of election law.
Candidates have been sued for not living in their districts, for taking illegal contributions. The dems sued to keep DeLay ON the Texas ballot. Dino Rossi was sued for supposed campaign law violations. Many, many lawsuits have been filed and decided regarding voter fraud.
If not being eligible is fraud, which it is, we all have standing.
check out: obamacrimes.com the supreme court has given a deadline of Dec1!
Lord I hope so.
Paul was on Lam Laphere overnight internet radio show last week.
Bottom line, Paul was wishy washy and claimed he didn’t know all the details. It’s amazing since he is such a constitutional first person.
IMO, he is as gutless as the overwhelming set of rhinos currently calling themselves republican.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.