Posted on 10/02/2002 4:59:02 AM PDT by Peach
However, that having been said, at this stage On the Ball Means, that while they are arguing this case, they should be sending someone with an argument in hand, to obtain an injunction prohibiting ballots from being changed pending a hearing, to the Federal District Court.(making an Equal Protection Argument.)
Where was she in 2000?
Say lets run Guiliani in New Jersey. Certainly if its okay for Lautenburg to make the ballot at this date, it must be okay for Rudy.
I think the opposite conclusion might be drawn from that. It is Federal precisely because it is not a national election. It is a state election for a Federal office which peforms certain national responsibilities. Federal and National are not the same thing.
You forgot to add whatever you can get from the John Birch Society or your local militia organization. (SARACASM OFF)Your paranoia runs deep.
I haven't researched the law, and don't have a clear or coherent opinion as to which court properly has the last word, nor on which way the courts should rule on removal of Toricelli's name from the ballot. But, that being said, there is a big difference between the Office of President (which represents all of the USA) and the Office of Senator (which represents one state). That difference militates in favor of the SCONJ being the last word in this case.
The equal protection arguments, on the other hand, are constitutional in nature. That is, the equal protection argument (not all voters are given the same opportunity to exercise their vote) implicates the US Constitution, and the final word on interpretation of that is the SCOTUS.
I haven't thought through how an equal rights complaint could be raised by the Republican party. Any ballots already cast for Forrester could be counted for Forrester; so the only people possibly disenfranchised are those who already voted for Toricelli. I would expect the Democrat party to appeal to the SCOTUS on equal protection grounds, if they don't get their way with the SCONJ.
An outside shot that might be used to get the case to the SCOTUS rests on Article IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution, which guarantees a Republican Form of Government to each state. This clause might be used to limit HOW a state chooses its Representatives and Senators (e.g. representation won't be determined by a raffle where any interested person can by chances -- more payment = more chances, etc.); but NJ is having an election, which to me indicates it is exercising a Republican Form of Government.
Nope, turns out you're absolutely right. Serves me right for taking mainstream media at its word in a thread all about not taking the mainstream media at its word. *spanking myself*.
Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., will receive a federal pension of more than $74,000 a year when he leaves the Senate in January, according to a government watchdog organization that tracks congressional pay.
Torricelli, who was first elected to the House in 1982, will have served in Congress for 20 years when he leaves office. He also spent three years as counsel to former Vice President Walter Mondale.
Over the next 30 years, Torricelli should receive about $ 4.7 million in pension payments, according to the National Taxpayers Union.
The amount of pension money Torricelli, 51, will receive would not have changed if he had resigned his seat Monday, before his term expires, because he is over 50 years old and has worked for the federal government more than 20 years, according to the Office of Personnel Management, the federal agency that administers the pension system.
I think they will if the percieve a gross injustice that requires correction. Maybe we are counting out the NJSC too soon - perhaps they will actually step to the plate and rule on the law - but then I had hoped FLSC would do that too.
There is absolutely nothing keeping Torricelli from fulfilling his committment to the Democratic Party and the people of New Jersey except for the fact that he does not want to. Well, that's just to bad for Robert Torricelli. He does not have that choice.
The court action that infringes least upon the rights of the people is to deny this one person the right to withdraw his name from the ballot. Then everybody else is still whole. Everybody still has the right to vote for either major party or whomever they want via write-in.
Since Robert Torricelli has made repeated committments to run for Senator, raised and spent millions of dollars based on his promise to run for Senator, and stated in hundreds of public forums that he intends to run for Senator, it seems reasonable that the court would require him to honor his pledge and actually run for Senator.
This is the least intrusive option for the NJ Supreme Court and should be an absolute no-brainer. Plus, it has the added advantage of being in compliance with NJ Law.
To play Devil's Advocate, exactly how is the Foresster camp going to argue that they are being harmed by the not having the choice to vote for Lautenburg. Those opposing the switch in candidates werent going to vote for Toricelli or Launtenburg.
Advance time gives the electorate and critics time to properly evaluate a candidate and ferret out information that is hidden.
Advance time gives allows the towns to prepare proper ballots.
Advance time also gives the candidates and the electorate time to compare and contrast their posistions on issues.
Finally, a deadline provides a cutoff from allowing mass chaos on who is to be a candidate. If this deadline doesn't apply to the Democrats than by extension every other citizen who wishes to be placed on the ballot should have that right up until the day of the election. After all, the people have the right to a choice, don't they ?
LOL....Actually i was pondering this point last night.
BUT...IF the Governor and The judiciary are ignoring the written law of the Legislature, is the government truly Republican ?
Frankly, I'm surprised the minority party candidates are not raising Hell. This gives them a better shot, and lots more publicity.
Try hitting "report abuse"
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.