June 10, 2006

A Question For Texas Donks

You filed suit to prevent the Texas GOP from acting under the Texas Election Code to replace an ineligible candidate for office, former Congressman Tom DeLay. You argue that he is not a resident of Virginia, but is instead a resident of Texas.

Under the Texas Election Code, DeLay must "conclusively" establish by public record that he is a resident of another state, said Chad Dunn, an attorney for the state Democratic Party. Democrats contend he hasn't done so because he still has a Texas driver's license, was registered to vote in Fort Bend County, Texas, as of Thursday and gets a Texas homestead exemption.

How, then, do you deal with this?

DeLay told reporters Thursday he is a Virginia resident and planned to vote next week. [DeLay spokesperson Shannon] Flaherty said he obtained a Virginia driver's license and registered to vote in Virginia in late April or early May. She said he voted absentee because he will be traveling Tuesday, the state's primary day.

Delay has voted in Virginia. We all know that counties within Texas don't always notify each other of new registrations in a timely fashion -- what makes you think another state would be any better?

He has a driver's license in Virginia. How quickly do states notify each other of such things?

And as for the homestead exemption, that house is community property and Christine DeLay (who is staying here to work with the Rio Bend forster community) has not changed her residency -- which entitles the house to the homestead exemption, as I recall the requirements from when I applied for mine.

Is there ANY evidence you will accept of his having abandoned his Texas residency and becomeing a Virginia resident?

Posted by: Greg at 08:29 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 294 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Kind of makes you wonder why our leadership is failing to lead with clear, objective and decisive methodology? Per the law?

Why do we see more of them in the press and at political/social events beating their chests about all of this, and not doing what I consider to be an outstanding idea (your idea “DNall”) of going ahead and getting the “District Executive Committee” selected with our electors, ready with a plan, waiting for the word “go” from the State Chair?

Looks like a lot more talking and socializing than necessary and not a lot of action.

Good thing we have heard that there are seriously focused, credible races for the electors in Fort Bend and Harris Counties.

And for the most part all of this seems to be working right into the hands of the democrats at this point.

So, if the worstcase senario happens, there may be plenty of smelly stuff to be distributed to those whom have made this into a social or reward process for those supposedly leading the way.

Sorry, sometimes my sarcasm gets the best and worse in me.

Posted by: boyo at Sat Jun 10 10:57:57 2006 (xLk90)

2 Making any kind of moveto appoint electors would be bad, and possibly queer the entire process, due to the restraining order. One of the elements of the TRO is that it does not just forbid Tina Benkiser from doing anything, but it also forbids anyone acting at her behest or under her authority from acting to replace DeLay.

That, unfortunately, means us at the CD22 level -- and the county chairs -- for we would be acting under the authority of her declaration of ineligibility and at her direction under it. That could open us all up to contempt charges.

Not that I'm not contemptuous of the Donk Judge in Travis County who is interfering with our obligation under the election code.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sat Jun 10 13:58:51 2006 (wltJG)

3 Don't you know that you can only replace a candidate on the ballot under the following conditions:

1. The replacement must occur clearly outside the limits set by law.

2. The replacement candidate must be at lest 70 years old

3. You must be in New Jersey

4. You must be a Democrat.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at Sun Jun 11 00:17:32 2006 (DdRjH)

4 Harrr deee Har Har!

Priceless!

See we can finally have fun with this!

The prospective electors need to stop campaigning then if the TRO is still in place.

That means no letters, mass emails, going to social events and having "some" people fooled into thinking they are the "front-runners" for a position like that. And then having it printed in the media. etc. etc.

Right?

/sarcasm

Posted by: boyo at Sun Jun 11 00:30:08 2006 (xLk90)

5 Actually, boyo, that would only apply to SREC members who are the officially-sponsored candidates of the party establishment.

Those who are running grassroots campaigns for elector despite calls for them to kow-tow to the leadership on this matter can in no way be seen as acting at the behest of or under the authority of Tina.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sun Jun 11 01:10:24 2006 (Jqugw)

6 Good point.

But alas, I think the establishment will ignore that logic and proceed on course and speed.

And possibly, if we lose this seat to the democrats, there will be plenty of blame to go around to which the leadership will deflect blame on them, to the damage done by the Tom DeLay scandal(s).

So to some it will appear to be a win/lose/win, or lose/win/lose, depending on how you look at it.

Posted by: boyo at Sun Jun 11 07:38:52 2006 (xLk90)

7 Alas, i don't think that a judge would see anyone campaigning to be a violation.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Sun Jun 11 09:38:36 2006 (w85GK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
10kb generated in CPU 0.0047, elapsed 0.0112 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0075 seconds, 36 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]