Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The longer Al franken is delayed from taking office now, the longer he'll remain in office in 2015.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Towlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:48 AM
Original message
The longer Al franken is delayed from taking office now, the longer he'll remain in office in 2015.
Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution says "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote."

This was amended by the Seventeenth Amendment, which says "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote."

Therefore, even if Al Franken isn't reelected in 2014, he's guaranteed his six years of service by the U.S. Constitution, no matter how long they manage to delay the beginning of his term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hobbit709 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. You're wrong on that
The term is defined as six years from the normal starting time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
2. I don't think the date slides... I think it is based on date of election.
not when he actually assumes the office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. I... am not so sure of that.
Edited on Tue Feb-24-09 10:13 AM by sofa king
I did find an article that might have a full answer (or might not), but I don't have time to read it. And, I don't know if the link is going to work. It's a .pdf file:

http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FSAP%2FSAP19_01%2FS0898588X05000039a.pdf&code=1cdcc9c335baf0957fc0936b8a4b398c

In case that doesn't work, Google will turn up the article from the title, Partisanship and Contested Election Cases in the Senate, 1789–2002, by JA Jenkins, Northwestern U.

In a quick brush-over of some of the tables, I jumped to this immediate conclusion: the more redneck jokes one can tell about a state seems to be the primary indicator of how likely that state is to have a contested election. In descending order, the states with the most contested elections include: Louisiana, West Virginia, Kansas, Maryland. However, a large number of states have had five contested elections since their inclusion in the Union, including Delaware, which is not known for its redneck jokes.

Edit: I should add that the paper makes note of another phenomenon: the person who "wins" the first time around keeps the seat over 70 percent of the time. The person causing the trouble appears to have won only twice since 1789 (can that be right?). Much more often the Senate simply votes to vacate the seat, which generally forces the states to hold another election. One could argue that Coleman's primary objective must be to deny Minnesota its representation in the Senate, for he has minimal statistical or historical precedent for pursuing his line of attack to victory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
4. Even if that was legally valid, law means nothing to the Bushies, and they nullify it
as the Nazis did, using both corrupted Bushified-Nazified Law Enforcement, and corrupted Bushified-Nazified-cowering M$M.

It's a nice sentiment you have there, Towlie, but I wouldn't put money on it.

Chance of it happening the way you said it would: 0% ok, I'll be fair: 0.00000000000000001%.

Sorry to be so blunt, but you really should learn what country you are living in.

HINT: It ain't the country we were taught about in school.

http://www.truthdig.com/arts_culture/item/20080515_chalmers_johnson_on_our_managed_democracy/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml

(just a little taste to get you started on opening your eyes - but as they said in the movie "The Matrix", you may regret taking the Red Pill - somnolence in the face of oncoming terror and horror is often preferable to people)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-24-09 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. uh no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC