Posted on 02/26/2010 11:35:02 AM PST by Tigen
Republicans' chances to retake the Senate are limited by the fact that only a third of the chamber is up for re-election this year, but some conservative activists are pushing to force more Democrats onto the ballot in November by trying to recall them.
It's a long-shot approach, the legal hurdles are tremendous - no member of Congress has ever been recalled - and it's limited only to states with recall laws that are broad enough to include federal officeholders.
But the first test comes Tuesday, when a judge will hear oral arguments from the Sussex County Tea Party, which is trying to recall Sen. Robert Menendez, New Jersey Democrat.
"Nine states, including 12 Democratic senators who are not up for re-election otherwise, could all be on the ballot with a recall," said Peter Ferrara, a lawyer for the conservative American Civil Rights Union, which is helping the tea partiers with their case. "Given what they're doing on health care this year, that's just going to be a huge boost to the recall effort."
The legal obstacles are daunting.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
All States should have a recall provision. After all they are supposed to represent the people. If they don’t, they should be recalled. Otherwise, they continue their practices until election time. Then they collect their retirement. A recall should also nullify all retirement benefits.
‘Recall McCain’ effort gaining ground (July 30, 2001)
Arizona grass-roots group collecting thousands of signatures
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23821
The barriers to recalling a congressman or senator are tremendously high. Article I Section 5 of the US Constitution states: “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members[.]” The takeaway is that even if a state recalled a congressman or senator, the relevant House of Congress would also have to vote to expel him; otherwise he could serve out his term. On the other hand, if state law allows you to recall a state elected officer, you can do that just fine under the US Constitution.
But, a Congress critter who faced a recall election but kept his seat, by an act of the Congress, would have one heck of a time getting re-elected. I’d say his/her chances are the same as that proverbial snowball in hell.
We;ve already seen how democrats would use this. Liberals attempted to recall my last congressman before he ever took his seat in DC. They started trying to recall him within 3 days of the election using “allegations” of wrongdoing as their reason. He was later completely cleared of the charges the liberals were using.
I lived in a small town where after an election, the City Council pulled some stunt. and within a month EVERYONE of them were recalled. That was fun.
For that reason, I don’t support this. Let’s beat them fair and square rather than using tricks and gimmicks. It’s unseemly and any replacement politician brought in under such circumstances would be tainted.
The New Jersey case is about the First Amendment right to circulate a petition. The argument is that the ability of New Jersey to recall a US Senator cannot be properly litigated until a recall petition receives the proper number of signatures, and no court can prevent the people from circulating a petition.
If a petition gets the requisite number of signatures, then the recall issue will be litigated.
I believe they call that being “Palinized”.
My concern is that conservatives and libertarians will go too far in their enthusiasm, and they will alienate people. Right now, the majority of voters are sympathetic to us. Please, let us not blow it.
Recall would be the next best thing to term limits. I think we should BOTH remedies available to the citizens of each state that these critters are “suppose” to represent.
I’m no Constitutional scholar, but if there is no explicit prohibition in the Constitution, then it would seem by virtue of the 10th that the right to recall a representative is retained by the states or the people.
Maybe I just look at things to simply...
Senators are suppose to represent the State not the people.
The house of representative is suppose to represent the people.
But your right the State like the people aut to have recall capability.
The “national interest” is represented by the presidents not congress and the house. the people and their state presumptively to some extent share the natural interest, but to the extent they do not it should not be the “national” interest.
Senators are suppose to represent the State not the people.
The house of representative is suppose to represent the people.
But your right the State like the people aut to have recall capability.
The “national interest” is represented by the presidents not the Senate or House per-say. The people and their State presumptively to some extent share the “natural interest”, but to the extent they do not share the “natural interest”, such should not be regarded as the “national interest”.
We need to pay more attention to state elections. We must elect tougher, REAL, conservatives to the legislatures and the governor’s office. People who will push for the 10th amendment, seek to overturn the 17th amendment, and introduce state laws to recall federal office holders.
It isn’t just the fed that screws us...
Even if it were to fail, no congress critter wants to face that. Recall would be a shot across the bow, warning them that the people are not happy and they need to listen.
Could y’all make an exception and include RINO fag Lindsey Graham in your plans.
Actually, just wishful thinking as SC has no recall law.
I noticed your screen name, your tag line and was wondering, will you be Marty63 next year?
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.