Posted on 07/06/2006 9:28:20 AM PDT by AntiGuv
"I advocated keeping our district Republican. Recall that I supported Tom Campbell in the primary."
Nonsense. DeLay can beat the stuffing out of Lampson.
All he needs to say is:
"I intend to win and then resign, so there will be a special election to replace me. This was brought about because the Texas Democrat party hates me so much that they would not let a replacement take my place in the November election."
Hopefully DeLay will use some of his idle time return the favor and campaign for Tom Tancredo.
I don't think that representatives can be appointed since the Constitution made them electable only by the people.
"Voters may not trust DeLay keep his promise to resign."
You know as well as I do that the Texas Election Code allows for the replacement of a candidate who dies before the election.
I agree with you that the court ignored the relatively clear meaning of the law and instead decided replace it with their own decision. However, the NJ law is not as clear and explicit at the Texas election law.
I don't think that the Republicans are even trying to suggest that he can be considered ineligible under Texas law or can withdraw and be replaced.
They are claiming that because Delay isn't a resident of Texas he isn't and eligible candidate under the US Constitution. However, the US Constitution's requirements appear to only require that a candidate be a resident when he is elected.
No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen.
Delay still has a house in Texas and is occupying it at least at times. The only thing preventing him from being a resident of Texas is his own choice.
He's trying to undermine the authority of the States (all the States, not just Texas) to regulate their own elections with what might be considered a novel technicality at best.
That's not not an action I would expect from someone who wishes to be considered a leader among small government conservatives.
I don't think that Earle's charges against him have merit. From what I've seen his past techniques that have earned him criticism have been more of what I would qualify as aggressive rather than underhanded.
This particular act I consider underhanded, and also damaging to our nation's laws and the structure of our government if he's successful.
While we really can't afford to lose his seat in Congress to a democrat, and the Republicans in his district deserve to have a candidate from their party on the ticket, I hope this Judge's ruling stands.
Delay is the Republican candidate in that race. The person trying to keep Republicans from having the ability to vote for their party's candidate, the one the selected in the primary, is Delay himself. According to Texas law it's too late for him to back out. He needs to abide by the law.
To be honest, his actions in this case are making me question his other actions a bit more than I had been.
"If DeLay promises to resign after winning, and a Republican would be able to run in a special election, why can't he win? Hawaii Democrats voted for a dead woman in order to be able to elect a Democrat in a special election, and they aren't any smarter than Texas Republicans."
You are right... There is another bonus...
If Delay actually *campaigns* he can pummel Lampson silly while not having to take any of the negative election cr*p ... since any 'anti-Delay' ads wont have much effect on people who just are voting to keep the seat GOP.
THE GOP CAN STILL TURN A LEMON IN LEMONADE HERE.
"However, the NJ law is not as clear and explicit at the Texas election law."
Hogwash. NJ law had a clear deadline and it was violated by the replacement of Torricelli.
" Delay still has a house in Texas and is occupying it at least at times. The only thing preventing him from being a resident of Texas is his own choice."
John Kerry has 6 fabulous houses in at least 4 different states. Is he eligible to serve as Senator in all 4 states?
Why do you say that? We wouldn't have this problem if Campbell had won the primary. Campbell would have actually run for office!
my question exactly ... a "lightening rod" must be some sort of magic wand which decreases the mass of and/or the gravitational force acting upon the object to be lightened....
Ping. . .
I think it's a tough gambit to pull off, and it helped that the dead woman was lionized in the media and out of the picture instead of being controversial and still very much with us.
But it may be what they have to do, if the appeal goes nowhere.
I suspect that Lampson might be easier to knock off in 2008 than in 2006, because a Presidential vote will bring out a lot of voters who don't involve themselves in politics beyond party ID and won't know Lampson from Ted Kennedy. And because we'll have a strong standard bearer.
":I asume Delay offered such "facts" from "another public record"."
Why don't you read the decision instead of assuming?
The only factor claimed to make him 'ineligible' is his alleged non-residency. The problem being that the Constitution says residency only matters on the date of election. Given that DeLay maintains a residence in Texas (his wife is living there), it is far from clear he *isn't* a 'resident' of Texas for election purposes.
DeLay is simply trying to avoid the penalty for withdrawing (no GOP replacement candidate allowed) by claiming to be non-resident, and having the GOP executive declare him ineligible by such non-residency. The problem is they can't legally make that decision, since the Constitution isn't something that a state political party can overturn by fiat.
--R.
It all varies by state law. Some states have stricter requirements than others, I would imagine. Kerry could -run- for election in any of those states, likely, but it wouldn't change that he was most recently elected to represent Massachusetts for one full term.
What's also interesting is that in both the Carnahan case and Torricelli case, we are talking about the Senate. DeLay is House, and so was Patsy Mink. Mink died a week after the Hawaii primary and the Democrats demanded that she be kept on the ballot anyway for name recognition. She won posthumously.
-PJ
"Er, the GOP was the *defendent* here.
The Dems are the ones who brought it into court. "
Yes, and the GOP defendant had it removed to Spark's (Federal) court.
Read the decision.
--R.
In other words, does Texas law already declare him to be a non-resident? Would he still be eligible for in-state tuition at UT, for example? I don't know about the former, I am quite sure that the answer to the latter is "no".
And so your motive is clear: spite.
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.