I'm having trouble here understanding what you mean. Exactly where is it written that appointees to commissions and committees will have entirely new terms, and that no appointments will be made to fill terms of those who leave for any reason.
I'd like a CLEAR cite on that.......no your "reading" or "interpretation."
What I'm trying to figure out here is why you, and only you, believe Berry has a leg to stand on. BTW, Mort Kondracke and Fred Barnes just said on The Beltway Boys that she is dead wrong; what do YOU think they are wrong?
You are assuming that its a one rule fits all situation. Its not. Each committee has different legislation with different wording. This particular legislation cleary says the members term SHALL BE 6 YEARS, period.
I am not making the claim who is right or wrong. I am merely making the claim that Berry does have a point and its not a black and white situation. The law clearly says SHALL BE 6 YEARS.
Shall is a very strong legal word. It ordinarily means MUST, without exception and this act provides for no exceptions.
The next one is 2/11/02 as I read it. It's listed as a XS appt so don't know what that is.........