Bilbray Sworn in to Replace Rep. Cunningham (Results aren't certified!!!)

How in the world is this possible - San Diego is still counting absentee votes and the Registrar of Voters has not certified the results for the 50th district! How corrupt can things get? Did they not learn anything with Cunningham??

Jun 13, 1:11 PM EDT
Bilbray Sworn in to Replace Rep. Cunningham
By ERICA WERNER
Associated Press Writer
AP Photo/DENNIS COOK
U.S. Video
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CUNNINGHAM_REPLACEMENT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A week after his special-election victory - and six months after his predecessor pleaded guilty to bribery - San Diego Republican Brian Bilbray was sworn in to the House Tuesday to replace ex-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

After House Speaker Dennis Hastert administered the oath, Bilbray, 55, gave a floor speech sounding the theme he believes boosted him to victory - illegal immigration, not congressional corruption.

"We did not enjoy the situation or appreciate the problem that created the vacancy," Bilbray said. "But let me say quite clearly - what is obvious in the last few months is the greatest scandal in America is not that one man broke the law, but that 12 million illegal immigrants are in this country and Washington isn't doing enough about it."

Bilbray, who served in the House from 1995 to 2000 in a different San Diego-area district, beat Democrat Francine Busby by four percentage points with 49 percent of the vote. Both major parties spent heavily on the race in Cunningham's wealthy, heavily Republican coastal district, believing that a Democratic upset could signal serious risks for the GOP in the November midterm elections.

<snip>

Honestly, do you think anything is going to change the outcome?

You expect the repubs are going to grow a conscience and integrity? Do you want to buy a bridge?

is not valid; they're just going to have to repeat it if Bilbray is certified the winner. Which will make them look rather foolish. Although not as foolish as they'll look if all of San Diego elections are declared invalid due to failure to keep all voting machines secure (voting machines were sent home with poll workers for up to 2 weeks before elections). It goes without saying the elections in SD should be declared invalid but almost certainly, will not be, because SD is so corrupt.

Did you intend your reply to be offensive?

I've just learned how They operate. After watching all the elections they've stolen, this is right out of their playbook.

There is absolutely NO accountibility for these people. I'd so like for the liberals to get just ONE victory of significance to change things even a tiny bit. But it ain't happening anytime soon.

many people get sworn in before the results are formally certified and there is no need to swear them in again once the certification is formal. And, despite what we might hope or wish, there is no pending challenge to Bilbray's election so this is simply SOP.

Also, even if there was a legitimate challenge to the election, that still wouldn't guarantee that the properly elected rep has to be seated. It's not fun to remember but the Dems proved that in the 1985 election in Indiana's "bloody eighth" where the Dems seated Frank McCloskey even though Indiana state officials had declared his Republican opponent, Richard McIntyre, to be the winner. Unfortunately true.

of the elections. So there's a bit of a tension here: CA has not finished "choosing" until the results are certified. I still think the swearing in is a violation - a violation of the constitution, it seems.

Article 1, Section 5 of the U.S. Constitution says that the U.S. House is the final judge of its own elections (a position that the Supreme Court has refused to modify). The process is that the Committee on House Administration makes a recommendation on the matter to the full House which then decides.

But Article 1, Section 2 says:

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

=================
No one can claim there was anything unconstitutional about the McCloskey/McIntyre event. I wonder why Indiana turned the ballots over? I suppose because the Dems, using the constitution, could use their majority to vote in McCloskey even without a recount.
=================
Article 1. Section. 5.

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution_transcript.html
========
And anyone who claims Congress cannot collect taxes should read Article 1, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

They make it up as they go along. Just like Organized Crime. When 95% of Americans "get it", maybe then real change can occur.

Just a thought. Counting the vote isn't the only way to win elections, candidates frequently concede before the count is done and certified.

matters. A candidate isn't allowed to win and then give up the seat (or even give up the seat before winning); they can't say, "I turn the position I won over to person X". If the winning candidate doesn't want the seat, there are procedures that must be followed to either elect or appoint a new person to that seat.

I would be surprised if any state would allow a candidate's concession to override the will of the voters by allowing the winning candidate to turn the seat over to someone else, including the 2nd place candidate.

Get with the times! Today we just wing it and hope for the best! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

seat. This is something that is so black and white that everyone should be screaming about it.

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/Eng/Epast.html

They still have only the Primary results. So WTF is this?

So yes - WTF? Someone in the media needs to pick up on this.

vote in the congressional district in which they are candidates".
Until the election results are certified, *this has not occurred*.
Bilbray is *NOT* a member of the House of Representatives and therefore, cannot vote on anything until the election results are certified.

http://clerk.house.gov/members/memFAQ.html
How is a Representative nominated and elected?
House candidates of major political parties are nominated by primary election in most states. Some states also provide for a party convention or committee recommendation in conjunction with a primary. In many states, no primary election is held for a particular office if the candidate is unopposed for nomination. Minor party candidates in most states are nominated according to individual party rules and procedures. Independent candidates are nominated by self-declaration.

Major party candidates are afforded automatic ballot access in all states, while minor party and independent candidates must meet various state requirements, such as submission of petition signatures of registered voters, in order to be placed on the general election ballot.

Representatives are elected by plurality vote in the congressional district in which they are candidates.

because there will be a runoff in November between Bilbray and Busby? this was only a temporary position. We'll kick his ass in November, and hopefully someone will dig up a connection between the Duke and Bilbray, since Bilbray and he were such close "friends". Naturally, Bilbray doesn't want to talk about the scandal, divert, divert.

If I were Brian, I wouldn't get too comfortable. It's not over.


http://marjorieanndrake.blogspot.com/

certified. Even the registrar of voters has said that.
See here: http://www.bradblog.com/

This is to set up a sense of inevitability. It sounds like it is illegal, but that seems to matter little.

Premature jubilation!!!

Is the media hiding the outcry? Why wasn't there protests about this? Why are the democrats condoning the actions of this administration?

in San Diego (taken home for up to two weeks by temporary poll workers). None of the election results in San Diego county, including the Bilbray/Busby one, can be considered valid, given that anyone could have tampered with voting machines (these poll workers have a few hours training on how to deal with voters and questions at the polls - that it).

race. Busby took a horrible stance on that issue especially for that district.

results are certified, is it?

state this information.

correcting herself (but the right wing media only played it up to the correction)? She did quite well considering how overwhelmingly Republican the district is - the Democrats weren't even planning on challenging Cunningham in 2004 because they figured a Democrat couldn't even get close; Busby took him on herself and by doing, there was a viable Democratic candidate in position to challenge the seat when Cunningham resigned.

It's easy to second-guess a candidate - she also had to think about her base, her own integrity.

When voting machines are being sent home with pollworkers for weeks, it's hard to believe in the integrity of any election in San Diego.

Perhaps that's why the House rushed to swear in Bilbray (although it's not clear that it's even a valid swearing in since according to the Constitution, the people of each state choose their Representatives, and until the election results are certified by San Diego, the people haven't chosen.

If we ask people trying to get elected to have all of the answers, and call them "horrible" if they don't have those answers, we're not going to get any new reps in November when we need to be kicking out Republicans on their rears. It's not important that we have a bill that will win NOW in either congressional house, but something that newer candidates can get behind that speak to the citizenry that will get the base out AND attract those in the middle because they hate both corporate raping of labor that the guest labor program would continue to enable, as well as don't want a wall on our border. I gotta believe there are plenty of people like that out there.

It's a larger issue than just Busby's stance on immigration. The "compromise" bill that many Dems side with McCain on is something she signed on with, and personally I didn't care for it either, though it was better than what Sensenbrenner and Bilbray were supporting. The other choice she had was the insane Sensenbrenner bill that would probably eventually get us into a border war with Mexico. If the Dems were to put forth a different alternative that didn't server corporations more than our citizenry, and protected our jobs by going after people hiring illegals and going after Mexico itself to have them provide better economy and jobs for their own people, that would have sold a helluva lot better than either of these other two bills are now. I can't fully support either of them, and I think many other residents here feel the same way.

I think it's a bit much to ask that she as a not-yet-elected candidate has the complete solution and a new bill for the Dems to jump on board with. I think something more along the lines of what Thom Hartmann feels is a solution would be better for the Dems to get behind. If she had done this bill idea herself, then great! But I think it would be better if the Dem's already in the House took some leadership on this to help get this started. I think I'll be talking with her to see if she can work with them on such a bill for November or see if others are working with her on this. I DO think that McCain is pitching a losing solution for this. Which perhaps we can even use against him in 2008 too I think.

She did have a verbal faux pas that she's responsible for, but I think that was way over done in terms of the fallout from it. Had she been able to get behind another alternative to the bills already out there, it would have been easier for her to dismiss people trying to contruct fallacious meanings out of her comment.