[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

The issue should be should the party REMOVE him, not ELECT him. The media are liars.

I won't dispute the last sentence, they usually are.

They did, however, report the fact that Senator Lott was elected Majority Leader when the Party caucus was held for that purpose. I even remember seeing it in the Pravda. It just wasn't highlighted because it was, well, yawn! Seriously - who would have thought anything else, so it didn't rate much print space.

I guess, for me, it is in what context the term "election" is being used. I read it as "contest." And if it comes to pass there is a vote taken among Republicans on Lott's future, that surely becomes a contest. So I didn't have a problem with the word "election," but that was because I passed it through the prism I just described.

But the sheeple probably didn't, so you have a point.

[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

Oh, boy. Look at the time. I'm late getting out of here. This has been a good discussion (which is why I ran long here), but I've really got to go.

Later.

[nicollo]

OK, here's my first report.

From the Senate Republican Conference Rules

"Revised June 2002"

Rules of the Senate Republican Conference

I. At the beginning of each Congress, or within one week thereafter, a Republican Party Conference shall be held. At that Conference there should be elected the following officers:

* Floor Leader
* Assistant Floor Leader
* Chairman of the Conference
* Vice Chairman of the Conference
* Chairman of the Policy Committee
* Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee

I don't find any amendments to these rules. However, since the Conference elections were held in November, before the end of the previous session and not at the beginning of the new session as per these rules of June, 2002, a change must have been made in November, as Common Tator told us. New rules were probably enacted since the Senate majority went Republican prior to the new Congress (thank you Senator Talent!). I don't see a power play in that. It was an adaption to circumstance. Perhaps the rules weren't changed at all, and an exception was made for this situation. That would probably have to be done by unanimous consent.

In these old rules, I do not find in the rules the requirement for unanimous consent to vote for a new Majority Leader. That doesn't mean it's not there. I'll keep looking.

The November 13 election of Lott was made without objection. I don't see that the White House tried to intervene.