I don't see this standing. How can a state change the rules of a federal election? And what happens when we have fifty different sets of election rules to deal with?
The last time this came up Governor Brown refused to sign it into law.
Because the constitution gives the states absolute power in determining how presidential elections are run.
If California wanted to it could pass a law tomorrow canceling the election entirely and just awarding all its electors to the Democratic nominee. If they can do that why couldn’t they require financials to be on the ballot?
You could very well be right, I'm certainly not a constitutional lawyer.Because the constitution gives the states absolute power in determining how presidential elections are run.
If California wanted to it could pass a law tomorrow canceling the election entirely and just awarding all its electors to the Democratic nominee. If they can do that why couldn’t they require financials to be on the ballot?
You could very well be right, I'm certainly not a constitutional lawyer.
If they end up doing this, shouldn't it be applied to every elected official in the state? Actually, shouldn't it apply to every government employee?
And you're a classic liberal, smugly superior and convinced that you're infallible.Seriously though, you're the classic "conservative" completely, willfully, ignorant.
And you're a classic liberal, smugly superior and convinced that you're infallible.
It could very well be that the law as written will stand as a states rights issue, if so I have no problem with it. Or it could be challenged because the constitution only lists two requirements to be president. Why do the states get to add to those listed requirements? I don't know where the line is drawn, but I can see it becoming a clusterfuck as the various states start gerrymandering the rules to limit who can run.
As with many political rule changes, the democrats start them and the Republicans weaponize them. I don't think that's a good thing at all. The way to beat Trump is by running a solid candidate that beats him, not by changing the rules to exclude him.
Indeed, we don't have to have an election, but we would then lose congressional representation.Again, California doesn’t even have to hold an election if it doesn’t want to.
I hope every state passes this requirement. It is frankly bonkers that we as a country need to rely on the good will of the president to have basic information about if he is corrupt.
Indeed, we don't have to have an election, but we would then lose congressional representation.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Indeed, we don't have to have an election, but we would then lose congressional representation.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
And you're a classic liberal, smugly superior and convinced that you're infallible.
It could very well be that the law as written will stand as a states rights issue, if so I have no problem with it. Or it could be challenged because the constitution only lists two requirements to be president. Why do the states get to add to those listed requirements? I don't know where the line is drawn, but I can see it becoming a clusterfuck as the various states start gerrymandering the rules to limit who can run.
As with many political rule changes, the democrats start them and the Republicans weaponize them. I don't think that's a good thing at all. The way to beat Trump is by running a solid candidate that beats him, not by changing the rules to exclude him.
Trump doesn’t need CA to win since it’s winner take all there.
He could always disclose his taxes.You're forgetting the axiom, "As California goes, so does the rest of the country."
I don't think the rest of the country needs to go that way, but if enough of the country goes that way, Trump can't win.
He could always disclose his taxes.
What's next? Drug testing? Background investigation? Medical records?
Absolutely let's get this done. All elected officials. How about their appointees? How about the appointees appointees? Let's make it easy --- all civil servants local, state and federal. Fuck 'em, privacy's overrated.
elected officials aren't private citizens when it comes to the decisions they make on your behalf. This is all rather logical, tbh.
I'd like to see a non-partisan, NGO physical and mental health association that is charged with qualifying major candidates for office. It would be useful, don't you think, to disqualify old motherfuckers suffering from observable dementia and with the mental capacity of a 13 year-old from serving as president and other high offices?
I'm tired of accepting proud ignorance and simple stupidity as some sort of noble goal over the educated and the experts. Tired of this kleptocratic horseshit that is the GOP standard for nearly 50 years now.
His Utopia is better than that cluster fuck that you live in!Sounds great. I'm sure the candidates will all have to have blonde hair and blue eyes in your little utopia.
Sounds great. I'm sure the candidates will all have to have blonde hair and blue eyes in your little utopia.
Sounds great. I'm sure the candidates will all have to have blonde hair and blue eyes in your little utopia.
‘Maybe we should not have a president with a major mental illness’
‘WHATEVER, HITLER’
Sounds great. I'm sure the candidates will all have to have blonde hair and blue eyes in your little utopia.