Trying to Keep Delay on Nov Ballot?

I read this on another board I lurk on, that Texas Dems are trying to keep him on the November ballot and prevent Republicans from choosing a replacement candidate and that Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie filed a formal petition to block any ballot changes.

To continue in the Rethug's words: "The Democrats want a one-sided election...with no Republican candidate. That's just dirty." Whew. That's pretty sick/funny coming from them.

But I just want to know if this is being misrepresented. And besides that, isn't this similar to the 'thugs trying to keep Nadar on the ballot in many states?

The Repugs had a have a primary winner, and it's DeLay. He knew he would be stepping down but decided to run in the primary anyway. Or maybe when he saw how he was polling after the primary he decided to step down. Furthermore, that district is horribly gerrymandered. If the law precludes the Repugs from appointing another candidate, they need to follow that law, especially if they miscalculated trying to game the system.

We are scratching and fighting our butts off to take this state back. Not for political gain but to reverse some very dangerous things the Repugs have instituted and reinstate the good things they have thwarted - such as children's health insurance, recourse for homeowners, etc.

What state do you live in? I have been visiting my family in New York State and to them, a lot of the dangers of the Bush adminstration and its cronies are academic. We're living it here.

and have felt more than academic pain. My husband worked in a steel mill that went downhill due to Bush dragging his feet before leveling the playing field with China, but too late for not just his mill but the whole American steel industry. Lost half his pension over that. Now he works for an oil refinery and the premier issue for us is protecting the plant and other dangerous plants in the area and Jersey. We're right across the river from NJ. Just two that come to mind, but there's more, believe me. I feel your pain WestHoustonDem, and I don't mean that in a trite way. I see Texas as the prototype, the model, for these corrupt heartess snakes. What he's done to your great state he's trying to do this great country.

My family is originally from upstate NY - outside of Binghamton. I go there to see my mom pretty often, unfortunately in a nursing home. Beautiful state. What part does your family reside?

Right on the Hudson. Unfortunately my visits lately have been to visit my dad in either the hospital or a nursing home. It really sucks having a parent on the decline. :hug:

I went to school in Ithaca and in Albany so I know Binghamton. I saw many concerts there.

I apologize if I got a little defensive. We get our backs up about Texas bashing sometimes. Think of it this way. DeLay made that seat his own, and running against him will help us highlight what a bunch of crooks the Republicans are.

She ia a brilliant, diligent, journalist who covers all things DeLay from ground zero.

http://www.brazosriver.com/index.html

And she is FUNNY as ...
http://www.fortbendnow.com/opinion/1277/susan-duquesnay-bankston-boy-howdy-hes-gonna-be-really-hacked-off

I just love this site and the way things play out. I've seen Juanita's site linked here before, but as much as I wanted to, didn't really dig into the Delay thing. Now I will. And I'll donate to the Dem running.

I think my post may have been badly written.

In a nutshell, I ended up on this stupid music messageboard debating red staters about politics. It's futile, we're outnumbered and they're idiots, mostly. But there's one or two that get my hackles up and I feel compelled to debate. Several Texan's, BTW. This Texan started a thread about the Delay ballot thing and I thought I'd run this by you natives to get the truth.

I've taken some flack from a few old timers here at DU for posts like this, but I feel it's a worthy exercise to stand up to untruth - even at an, ostensibly, shallow music board. There's some good liberal patriots there and we stick together. IMO, fight the good fight. You never know who's lurking, some young people who don't know much about politics except what they grew up with. Standing up to a lie is always a worthy thing, especially with these misguided people. If you're curious I can PM you the link.

ballot.

In truth, we just want DeLay and the GOP to follow Texas law which holds that a party cannot replace a candidate on the ballot when the candidate has withdrawn from the race after the parties' primaries (unless the candidate is withdrawing due to ill health or to accept another political candidacy appointment).

Instead of withdrawing before the primaries (which would have drawn a different candidate field in both parties primaries), DeLay tried to lie behind the log so he could hand pick his successor on the Republican ballot instead of allowing the voters to make that decision. Texas law rightly forbids this practice.

"What the Democratic Judge in Austin (once again Travis County and not in DeLay's district at all) has done is issue an temporary restraining order pending a hearing where the Democrats hope she will issue a temporary injunction to stop the Republicans from holding a meeting. The Democratic lawsuit states that DeLay can't be declared "ineligible" because there are no legal documents showing he'll be a resident of another state "when elected". I'm sure Republicans could come up with some public documents showing that DeLay will no longer be a legal resident of Texas at election time...and legally, according to Texas State Election Code, that would make him eligible to be on the ballot."

What the hell is she talking about?

Timing is everything.

When DeLay got his name on the ballot, he was a resident of Texas. If he is not a resident “when elected” to Congress then he cannot serve in Congress. But for that to be effective, he must be elected to Congress first. You can’t use the “when elected” argument until after the election.

The meeting in question is the effort of the Republican County Chairs to meet and select a candidate to replace the deserter. The Democrats don’t want that meeting to take place. Part of that is the obvious advantage of postponing the Republican fund raising and campaign organization. And of course we never pass up an opportunity to point out that the Republicans are a bunch of corrupt bastards.

The bottom line is that once you win the primary, you are the nominee. The County Chairs can’t overrule the voice of the people. Democracy means you live with the results of the election, even if you don’t like them. They should have known better. Every one else knew that DeLay was a crook, and electing a crook is like inviting a lion to dinner. Ultimately, it is the lion that decides what dinner will be.

The Republicans are getting screwed by the very guy that they idolized, proving that the only person DeLay cares about is Tom. And he’s got enough nerve to flip off his constituents as he walks out on them. It is almost too good to be true!

determines whether the GOP can replace DeLay's name on the ballot or not.

Except under certain exceptional circumstances which do not apply, a candidate who withdraws from a race after the parties' primaries cannot be replaced on the ballot with a new candidate of the withdrawing candidate's party's choosing. That is precisely what the GOP wants to do.

This law is in place to protect against the danger of a situation where, first, a powerful incumbent declares that he is running for re-election and thereby discourages primary challengers in his own party and also discourages some challengers from an opposing party who would have run for an open seat but who would not have run against an incumbent and, second, the incumbent waits until after the primary and then withdraws to allow the party (which he influences) hand-pick his successor on the ballot. This is a fundamental protection of our democracy, and people of good faith within every party should support this rule. Moreover, this is precisely DeLay's situation.

DeLay waited until after both parties completed their primaries and only then announced that he was withdrawing from the race with these words: "after many weeks of personal prayerful thinking and analysis, I have come to the conclusion that it is time to close this public service chapter of my life. It's time to begin opening new chapters and pursuing new opportunities to engage in the important cultural and political battles of our day from outside the arena of the U.S. House of Representatives.... So today, I am announcing my intention to resign my seat in the House."

Clearly, DeLay withdrew from the race after the primary and yet long before any circumstance had arisen which would, hypothetically and prospectively, effect his eligibility for office.

Also, the talk of residency is a misnomer. The Constitutional standard for eligibility for Congress is inhabitancy not residency. DeLay is not proposing to surrender his inhabitance in Texas; certainly no feature of DeLay's career stands out more prominently than his steadfast belief that the laws do not apply to him as they apply to everyone else, but even DeLay must realize that indicted criminals do not enjoy the unilateral right to simply give up their inhabitance in the state where they are under indictment.

Instead of withdrawing before the primary or, alternatively, engaging in a course of action where Delay first divested himself of his Texas inhabitance, and then was declared ineligible, and finally the GOP sought to replace him on the ballot, DeLay couldn't resist the urge to grandstand with an announcement of his withdrawal from the race before he has even begun any of the processes which might have resulted, hypothetically, in his being found ineligible.

In sum, DeLay he is merely seeking to game the Election Code by withdrawing from the race but then pretending that he was prospectively declared ineligible.

Some within the GOP are saying that Delay never "officially" withdrew from the race because, while he announced his withdrawal on national television, he never filled out withdrawal papers. The Texas Supreme Court previously addressed a similar situation in Slagle vs. Hannah where the court held to the following interpretation of the law: "under § 145.036 of the Texas Election Code, the political parties may nominate a replacement candidate following a withdrawal if 'no political party that held primary elections has a nominee for the office sought by the withdrawing candidate as of the time of the withdrawal' {and} the confusion in this case stems from the fact that Aikin never officially withdrew his nomination for the Board." The court went on to find that Aikin had withdrawn for the purposes of deciding whether he should be replaced on the ballot despite the fact that he never officially withdrew his nomination.

Clearly, the courts have previously treated a candidate's effective withdrawal as if it were an official withdrawal for the purposes of the law governing whether the candidate can be replaced on the ballot even when the withdrawing candidate "never officially withdrew his nomination." Again, this is precisely DeLay's situation.

DeLay, as always, expects special treatment. Every facet of his political career demonstrates that he holds himself as above the law. The Texas court system should tell DeLay that he's not above the law that applies to everyone else and neither he nor any politician deserves special treatment under the law.

Will the Texas courts do justice? I cannot predict that outcome, but we should fight for justice in any event because either we prevail or, if the courts are biased to the point where they will not enforce the laws of Texas against a corrupt politician, then that is something we need to know about our judges because they, too, are elected officials who serve at the pleasure of the people.

I think I understand that situation much better now. You must have some legal training. Very interesting about the Slagle vs. Hannah case. Seems like the TX GOP can't have it both ways. Sounds like DeLay didn't have all his ducks in a row after all.

I really do hope that Texas courts will enforce the law, but as you said we can't predict the outcome. I'm much more impressed with the TDP's filing the case now.

thanks

Sonia

what a great analysis!! I need to make a copy to have with me to refer to whenever the subject comes up.

This should be sent as an op-ed to newspapers all over Texas and beyond.

The TRO is a short read, only 3 pages. I love this part:

:woohoo:

The petition itself is 54 pages with a lot of the same kind of explanation Czolgosz wrote above about inhabitancy and illegibility. There is even a mention about Tom's intent since it was covered in the Texas Monthly article. That intent part is on page 3 of the filing.

Very interesting.

Sonia

The only critique I have is that some of the premise of the arguement is based on knowing Delay's "intent" (actually, we do, but that would be the Repub's arguement, I suspect) but a minor detail.

I received an auto-dialed phone message form the Harris County GOP party chair Tuesday advising us all to call Nick Lampson to demand that he "allow a two-party race." As if. I called and donated money to Nick. I think I would like to see a GOP write-in candidacy - it would filter out the straight-party ticket votes and cost them a heckuva lot of money. What fun!

Sounds pretty desperate, but SHEEZ, I FRIGGING HATE THESE FRIGGING HYPOCRITICAL SCUM-SUCKING DUNGHOOKS and the KNUCKLE-DRAGGING, COUSIN-MARRYING, MOUTH-BREATHING, GUN-TOTING, LAME, IGNORANT MORONS they keep suckering to vote for them. (Pardon the language - I am trying to teach discretion to my child, but the thought is what counts.)

It all just makes me weep for humanity some days.

Read Czolgosz post #10. We are screwing them worse than they are screwing us!

Relish the fact that they are squirming like a snake with your boot on its head. This is the kind of thing that makes politics REALLY FUN!

Living in the "annexed" portion of District 22, still pissed off at Whitmire for caving and comimg back for the redistricting (I was a friend of the original Killer Bees), watching the Smarmy Exterminator pretend (to applause) that McCarthyism is to be applauded as "healthy partisanship," and watching the GOP manipulate their way into control (and not through legitimate electoral victory), I admit I am extremely disillusioned.

I would LOVE to win this one victory against the party scumbags - I think it could awaken others who think what the Exterminator did/does is SOP and "perfectly legal." We need to exploit holes in the apparatus propaganda and shine the light on these scumbags.

What kind of provisions do they make for write-ins in your neck of the woods? I assume you vote with machines. So how do you write in a candidate?

text. They have dials, and so there are screens where you can dial through the alphabet and select specific letters (kind of like adding the high score on one of the old arcade games). It would be a pain in the ass for lazy straight-party pugs, though, no matter what.

Thus, I would be loving it.

Yup - That, and the hope the "chosen" candidate will have a tough name to spell!

It's their side that screwed it up. They voted for Tom DeLay in the primary over his many competitors, so they chose their candidate. It's not our fault Delay is a weasel and he never intended to run in November. They have to follow the law, same as the rest of the people.

"Get over it" right back at them. :evilgrin:

Sonia

are (1) the people of Texas (first and foremost) who have the right to select the nominee during the primary and who enjoy the right that the GOP is trying to steal from them by hand-picking a replacement stooge, (2) the Republicans who would have run in the primary if DeLay was not trying to scam this election be waiting until after the primary to withdraw and the Republican candidates who ran and lost to an incumbent who has now withdrawn after the primary, and (3) the Texas Democratic Party and those Democrats who might have run if DeLay had not tried to scam the election because they would have run for an open seat but not against a sitting incumbent.

Lampson is not within the categories of people who have been most directly harmed by DeLay's illegal ploy because he did have the strength of conviction to run against DeLay. It is not Lampson's place to give away the public's right under Texas law to select the nominee in the primary, or the Republican candidates' and potential candidates' rights under Texas law to a fair contest for the nomination, or the Democratic Party's and potential Democratic candidates' rights under Texas law to know whether they are running for an open seat or against an incumbent.

Even if Lampson wanted to give up this challenge, it is not his rights at stake and not his fight to surrender.

I was complaining about the GALL of these people who try to blame him for their own chicanery!

If I didn't know that a bunch of idiots will FALL for that find of crap, I would find it laughable!

By the way - thanks for your EXCELLENT explanation of the situation. I haven't seen it reported here, and I may paraphrase for some of the local forums for the District 22 misguided.

ridiculous argument within the auto-phone call you got. I'm not sure everyone who might get a similar phone call would immediately understand why calling on Lampson to drop this matter would be like calling on Wilson to drop the charges against Scooter Libby -- such a call conveys a fundamental misunderstanding (or more likely deliberately misleading meme) about the nature of the crime and whose rights have been violated.

who came in second during the primary, who mounted a legitimate, grass roots campaign, and is being PUNISHED for daring to do so by underhanded tactics that DeLay, C4n3p, and Rove have used effectively AGAINST THEIR OWN PARTY.

When these guys wake up and realize that they have been sodomized by their own, the GOP is going to make the Democrats look RIDICULOUSLY functional in comparison...