[SternTrek]

The answer to this is so simple, i don't know why any of these bozos haven't proposed it yet. Torrecelli's name stays on the ballot, if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg. The court should see this as the "choice" for the voters.

[Peach]

The answer to this is so simple, i don't know why any of these bozos haven't proposed it yet. Torrecelli's name stays on the ballot, if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg. The court should see this as the "choice" for the voters.

That's basically what the DNC is doing in Hawaii. The congresswoman who died will remain on the ballot and if she wins, an appointment will be made by the DNC.

[blam]

"The answer to this is so simple, i don't know why any of these bozos haven't proposed it yet. Torrecelli's name stays on the ballot, if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg. "

That's what all this is about. Torricelli would not win, so...they have to circumvent or change the law.

What-ever Democrats want becomes the law.

[MortMan]

But who's going to trust the Torch to actually resign?

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

"if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg."

Why would the Torch resign after winning? Would you turn back your winnings if you won the lottery?

[XJarhead]

The answer to this is so simple, i don't know why any of these bozos haven't proposed it yet. Torrecelli's name stays on the ballot, if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg. The court should see this as the "choice" for the voters.

And if Torch doesn't resign after the election....? That's a bit of the fly in the ointment. Plus, I think that would mean that the seat would be up again in 2004 at a special election.

The answer to the "choice" issue is a write-in candidacy.

[Timesink]

The answer to this is so simple, i don't know why any of these bozos haven't proposed it yet. Torrecelli's name stays on the ballot, if he wins he promises to resign the seat and McGreevy appoints Lautenberg. The court should see this as the "choice" for the voters.

Except that if the Torch resigns before the start of the next Congress, his pension is cut substantially and he can't start taking it for a number of years. If he hangs in until January, he gets his full pension and the checks start rolling in immediately. Thus he's not willing to resign, period. Remember, these are Democrats we're talking about. When truly backed against the wall, who are they going to look out for first, the interests of the party or the cash?