Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Drew68
Yes background checks could be bad, although if rejection had to be for specific cause, and could be challenged in court, not too bad. If rather than "background" checks, they were simple "eligibility checks" before being placed on the primary ballot I think they would pass muster. As it is, several candidates who where ineligible were removed from ballots in the not too distant past. Two, Eldridge Cleaver and later Larry Holmes, were not old enough, another, Roger Calero, was foreign born.

Simple majority elections do not override the Constitution.

129 posted on 04/26/2010 6:25:58 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato
If rather than "background" checks, they were simple "eligibility checks" before being placed on the primary ballot I think they would pass muster.

On the subject of verifying a candidate's eligibility for office prior to placing their name on the ballot, you'll get no argument from me.

136 posted on 04/26/2010 7:19:38 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson