Posted on 06/16/2007 5:18:55 AM PDT by radar101
The U.S. House of Representatives shot down a proposal Friday by U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz, that would have built an 854-mile, double layered security fences along the Mexican border.
Franks noted that only 13 miles of a Mexican border fence approved last year have been built and that the fencing is needed to improve border security.
"With over 4,000 people crossing our southern border illegally every day, our border remains one of our country's most critical national security vulnerabilities. In order to carry out an act of terrorism, a militant Islamist simply needs a porous border and a dangerous weapon," said Franks in a statement.
Franks represents Glendale, Peoria, Sun City and Kingman.
The fence plan failed by 272 to 149 votes. Most Democrats (including Arizona congressional members Harry Mitchell, Gabrielle Giffords , Ed Pastor and Raul Grijalva) voted against the border fence plan.
Most Republicans (including Franks and fellow Arizona Reps. Rick Renzi and John Shadegg) voted for the comprehensive fence plan.
Mesa GOP Congressman Jeff Flake crossed party lines and vote against the border fence bill.
The House did approve an overall homeland and border security appropriations bill Friday. Mitchell said he backed that bill because it allocates federal money to hire more Border Patrol Agents and resources to deport violent illegal immigrant criminals.
"Deporting those illegal immigrants who have committed violent crimes is absolutely imperative to keeping our communities safe," Mitchell said in a statement. Mitchell represents Tempe and Scottsdale.
The state's four Democratic representatives and Renzi voted for the final bill. Flake, Franks and Shadegg opposed.
The votes could be a precursor to a big political fight over immigration reforms, a guest worker program and how to deal with the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
Bookmark.
from the link (in blue):
El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan
El Plan is, to be brief, a racist, seditionist and treasonous document. To wit:
“Aztlan [the Southwestern United States] belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gathers the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent. Brotherhood unites us, and love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come and who struggles against the foreigner “gabacho” who exploits our riches and destroys our culture. …
Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada.” [For those of the Hispanic race, everything. For those outside the Hispanic race, nothing.]
Under Organizational Goals, El Plan Espiritual continues: “economic control of our lives and our communities can only come about by driving the exploiter out of our communities, our pueblos and our lands. … Lands rightfully ours will be fought for and defended.”
Under the “Self-Defense” section, El Plan Espiritual proclaims “For the very young there will no longer be acts of juvenile delinquency, but revolutionary acts.”
El Plan Espiritual finishes “El Plan de Aztlan is the plan of liberation!”
The Philosophy of MEChA sums up the goals out El Plan Espiritual thusly:
“1) We are Chicanas and Chicanos of Aztlán reclaiming the land of our birth (Chicana/Chicano Nation); 2) Aztlán belongs to indigenous people, who are sovereign and not subject to a foreign culture; 3) We are a union of free pueblos forming a bronze (Chicana/Chicano) Nation.”
This is not poetic license. This is not ethnic pride. This is a declaration of war.
Yeh, well it’s like we Combat engineers always say about obstacles - in this case the fence - they need to be covered by both direct and indirect fire........
This is the best site I have found for recall information.
From what I can find out, it has never been successfully attempted, but only seven states have restrictions. I guess it’s free for all in the others.
Unfortunately, it looks like we here in GA have to chance at recall, unless we can get the legislature to change the law.
Specific grounds for recall are required in only seven states:
Alaska: lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption (AS §15.45.510)
Georgia: act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office; violation of oath of office; failure to perform duties prescribed by law; willfully misused, converted, or misappropriated, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed. Discretionary performance of a lawful act or a prescribed duty shall not constitute a ground for recall of an elected public official. (Ga. Code §21-4-3(7) and 21-4-4(c))
Kansas: conviction for a felony, misconduct in office, incompetence, or failure to perform duties prescribed by law. No recall submitted to the voters shall be held void because of the insufficiency of the grounds, application, or petition by which the submission was procured. (KS Stat. §25-4301)
Minnesota: serious malfeasance or nonfeasance during the term of office in the performance of the duties of the office or conviction during the term of office of a serious crime (Const. Art. VIII §6)
Montana: physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, conviction of certain felony offenses (enumerated in Title 45). No person may be recalled for performing a mandatory duty of the office he holds or for not performing any act that, if performed, would subject him to prosecution for official misconduct. (Mont. Code §2-16-603)
Rhode Island: authorized in the case of a general officer who has been indicted or informed against for a felony, convicted of a misdemeanor, or against whom a finding of probable cause of violation of the code of ethics has been made by the ethics commission (Const. Art. IV §1)
Washington: commission of some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violation of oath of office (Const. Art. I §33)
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/recallprovision.htm
BTTT!
A list we need to keep for a very long time. To remind us what happens when you let the bastards vote themselves whatever they want in the way of pay, power and privileges.
Quite a few deserve to be dragged out of their posh offices and into the streets for some old fashioned American justice...then, tar & feathers for a ride on a rail out of town.
Truthkeeper see post #204 by Politicalmom as a guide/advice on our effort.
And a little more:
***
Some have argued that U.S. Senators are not subject to recall. Recall opponents (the media) give vague reason and reference to “Federally Elected Officials.” Senators are clearly state elected officials that are selected to represent state interests on a federal level in state elections.
The unsuccessful attempts by states to enforce term limits have been argued as precedent against the recall of Senators. This is an inaccurate assumption. The 17th amendment transfers the electoral power to the people from the state legislature for the selection of U.S. Senators. The recall is the exercise of the electoral power of Arizona citizens, the people not the legislature. The term limit laws of the states need to be put into place by the people not the legislatures.
The 17th Amendment goes on to describe the process on how to fill seats in the Senate when they become vacant. Clearly, it is expected that seats will become vacant for whatever reason. Removal from office by the will of the people is a valid reason that is not prohibited by any language in the 17th Amendment.
Recall opponents will then try to argue that the term period (six years for Senators) is so firmly established in the Constitution that it can not be affected by the will of the people. Opponents to recall will also cite Article 1, Section 5, Clauses 1 & 2, which empowers each house of congress to be the judge of elections, returns and qualifications of its members and grants them the ability to expel a member with a 2/3 vote. This assumes that the power “to expel” lies solely with each body of congress and is exclusive of the will of the people.
Three other Amendments give the recall effort of the people of Arizona the right to fix the problems with a lack of representation in the Senate:
Article [I.]
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article [IX.]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Article [X.]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The U.S. Constitution does not prohibit the recall. Think about it, would the framers of the constitution want to restrict the electoral power of the people so much that they could not fix a problem with a non-representative Senator?
Read for yourself:
The U.S. Constitution
http://www.house.gov/paul/constitutiontext.htm
The Arizona Constitution
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/const/8/1.p1.htm
This line is intriguing: “twenty- five per centum of the number of votes cast at the last preceding general election for all of the candidates for the office held by such officer.”
Title 19 Arizona Revised Statutes
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/19/00201.htm
The last general election in 2000 dealt with Senator Kyl’s U.S. Senate seat. There were about 1.4 million votes cast all of the candidates, which translates to about 350,000 signatures required for a recall. We believe that the “preceding general election” language refers to John McCain’s office as he is the officer we are recalling. In his election held in 1998 about 975,000 people voted for the office of U.S. Senator in Arizona. That would mean about 244,000 signatures are required on the Recall John McCain petition. Title 19 of the A.R.S. contradicts Article 8 of the Arizona Constitution in how the number of petitioners is derived in this case. The AZ Constitution is the authority. A request from the Arizona Attorney General for interpretation on this issue is pending.
http://www.recallmccain.org/LegalFront.htm
Looks doable, huh?
I think we need to choose one or two to start with.
McCain would be great symbolically, but may have too much support still lingering.
Maybe target Reid and Lott, one of each party?
IMO, both good targets in today's environment.
A Grassroots effort to Recall McCain - Report from Payson, AZ
B T T T
RECALL
B T T T
We need to recall these SOB’s NOW!!
All things considered,it’s hard for rational people to believe the Federal Government isn’t intentionally destroying this country.
we need to do this all over the nation... letters, phone calls, etc., are not working like a march of millions of angry voters will...
We will not even recognize the United States of America.
Oh well, it was nice while it lasted. We do have some good memories at least. Westward Ho!-type expansion. Man on the Moon 1969. Victories in WWI and WWII. The Eisenhower Interstate System. Babe Ruth. National parks. Carhops in the 50s.
Just say NO to Illegal Alien Amnesty!! Keep calling!! It’s NOT OVER!!
U.S. Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121
U.S. House switchboard: (202) 225-3121
White House comments: (202) 456-1111
Find your House Rep.: http://www.house.gov/writerep
Find your US Senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
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.