10
   

CNN: Giffords to Resign from Congress

 
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2012 06:04 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:

Just because congress had not used this power on members for medical reasons in the past does not mean that they can not do so at their whim!!!!!!

You think that Congress has the Constitutional authority to unseat a member, who has been duly elected by the people, on whim? Or because of medical reasons? You are such an ignorant fool, you really just embarrass yourself with such foolish comments.
Quote:
Expulsion is the most serious form of disciplinary action that can be taken against a Member of Congress. Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."

Process leading to expulsion

Presently, the disciplinary process begins when a resolution to expel or censure a Member is referred to the appropriate committee. In the House, this is the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (House Ethics Committee); in the Senate, this is the Select Committee on Ethics (Senate Ethics Committee).

The committee may then ask other Representatives or Senators to come forward with complaints about the Member under consideration or may initiate an investigation into the Member's actions. Sometimes Members may refer a resolution calling for an investigation into a particular Member or matter that may lead to the recommendation of expulsion or censure.

Rule XI (Procedures of committees and unfinished business) of the Rules of the House of Representatives state that the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct can investigate allegations that a Member violated "any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of such Member... in the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities". The Senate Select Committee on Ethics has the same jurisdiction. The committee may then report back to their whole chamber as to its findings and recommendations for further actions.

When an investigation is launched by either committee, an investigatory subcommittee will be formed. Once the investigatory subcommittee has collected evidence, talked to witnesses, and held an adjudicatory hearing it will vote on whether the Member is found to have committed the specific actions and then will vote on recommendations. If expulsion is the recommendation then the subcommittee's report will be referred to the full House of Representatives or Senate where Members may vote to accept, reject, or alter the report's recommendation. Voting to expel requires the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present and voting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_from_the_United_States_Congress

Giffords was not guilty of "disorderly conduct", she did not violate any "any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct", she did not commit treason, she did not take bribes, and nothing she did, or failed to do, could possibly have justified such severe disciplinary action as expulsion, and your assertion that Congress could have voted to expel her, or any other member, "on whim" is just plain absurd.

This topic appears over your head, BillRM. Even your hypotheticals should have some connection to reality.
Being shot in the head, and being absent from Washington during a period of recovery, does not qualify as reasons for expulsion.
BillRM
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2012 06:16 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You think that Congress has the Constitutional authority to unseat a member, who has been duly elected by the people, on whim? Or because of medical reasons? You are such an ignorant fool, you really just embarrass yourself with such foolish comments.


They sure have been given the power in the constitution to removed a members and no standard but their own judgment to go by.

All the existing protocols and rules was set up by congress to deal with this matter can be change or even ignore by congress.

It is 100 percents under the control of 2/3 of congress.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2012 06:21 pm
@BillRM,
Laughing dream on.

The more you pursue this issue, the more foolish you sound. Laughing If you want to continue your idiotic argument, you can do it by yourself. And you like talking to yourself, you do it all the time. Laughing

roger
 
  3  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2012 06:26 pm
And another thread with potential bites the dust.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 28 Jan, 2012 06:37 pm
@firefly,
I love it when you run away from the facts...............

Hell even Izzy once admitted he was wrong and I would do so if I was ever wrong. Wink
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 06:45 am
@farmerman,
The constitution is the subject - read it - it will enlighten you.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 06:52 am
@H2O MAN,
Ive read it as well as several other documents which are explanations of what the founding fathers had in mind. Try that, it may help your somewhat constipated education.

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 11:40 am
Formerman, you say that you have read these documents, but there is no proof that you understand them
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 02:06 pm
@H2O MAN,
What do you want to know there spurt? can you perhaps even formulate a question?

H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 02:24 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

can you perhaps even formulate a question?




Formulated and posted earlier.

H2O MAN wrote:

... now show us were the word 'democracy' is used in the constitution
and also were it states citizens have the right to vote in a presidential election.


Don't hurt yourself trying to fabricate an answer there Formerman.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 02:41 pm
@BillRM,
Should the US Senate move for the removal of Senator Kirk(R) Illinois??
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/01/28/sen-kirk-speaking-asking-for-phone-after-stroke/
His best prognosis is at least a year of rehabilitation before being able to return to work.

Joe(He's sitting in Barack Obama's former Senate seat.(Nation
hawkeye10
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 02:51 pm
@Joe Nation,
Quote:
His best prognosis is at least a year of rehabilitation before being able to return to work.


Says who? The evidence you present has it that he is still in intensive care, and that his prognosis for recovery is unknown. Methinks you are jumping the gun with your conclusions.
Joe Nation
 
  5  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 04:55 pm
@hawkeye10,
You're right. I was being depressingly downbeat and I should have mentioned that I really feel for the guy and that I hope he has a remarkable recovery.

The article and (I've just returned from Chicago where the Senator's condition was the lead story every evening) the local media all report 'months of inhouse therapy' will be necessary for his rehabilitation.

At what point in time, Hawkeye and BillRM, do you think it would be proper to start talking about appointing a replacement to fill out the Senator's current term?
Thirty days from now? After the Senator has missed a total of more than one hundred floor votes due to absence? When?

And who should start the process? The Governor who also represents all of the people of Illinois or the Senator's own office?

Joe(what are the precedents for going forward? Gifford's?)Nation
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 05:04 pm
@Joe Nation,
In Giffords case the three month mark after injury is where I understand a solid evaluation can be made on prognosis for recovery, re the Illinois guy I assume that the situation is nearly the same.

Quote:
And who should start the process?
Chamber leadership should have a medical opinion forwarded to them at the three month mark, if there is no reasonable expectation that this guy can be back on the job with-in 6-9 months and he has not done the right thing and resigned then the chamber should act to find the chair vacant, and request that the state send someone to fill it. THey however will not.
Joe Nation
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 05:22 pm
@hawkeye10,
By chamber leadership, I assume you mean Senator Mitch McConnell, the Minority Leader. The Democratic Majority gains nothing by hurrying the process, what they have now is a vote of absent on every issue and no voice of opposition.

This situation must happen with some regularity over the years. I've just never paid it any attention. I don't want to be unkind, but I did think Strom Thurman wasn't able to govern his own affairs, nevermind the affairs of his State, for the last sixteen months of his life.

Joe(nearly comatose)Nation
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 05:22 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Chamber leadership should have a medical opinion forwarded to them at the three month mark, if there is no reasonable expectation that this guy can be back on the job with-in 6-9 months and he has not done the right thing and resigned then the chamber should act to find the chair vacant, and request that the state send someone to fill it. THey however will not.

Of course not, they have no authority to do that. Did the previous discussion on this issue go right over your head?

hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 05:27 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

Quote:
Chamber leadership should have a medical opinion forwarded to them at the three month mark, if there is no reasonable expectation that this guy can be back on the job with-in 6-9 months and he has not done the right thing and resigned then the chamber should act to find the chair vacant, and request that the state send someone to fill it. THey however will not.

Of course not, they have no authority to do that. Did the previous discussion on this issue go right over your head?




There is nothing in the Constitution that says that they can not. so they can. You would have some argument if the Supremes have ever ruled that the Chambers do not have the right to rule empty chairs as vacant positions, but I am reasonably sure that you can not make this case.

That damn Constitution trips you up every time doesn't it...
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 05:40 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
There is nothing in the Constitution that says that they can not. so they can.

Quote:
There is no specific protocol, procedure, or authority set out in the United States Constitution, federal law, or congressional rule for the Senate (or the House) to recognize "incapacity" of a sitting Member and thereby declare a "vacancy" in such office.

It goes the other way--if nothing gives them the authority to do it, they can't do it.
Quote:
Under the general practice and operations in the Senate (as well as in the House), personal "incapacity" of a sitting Member has not generated proceedings to declare the seat vacant, and sitting Members of the Senate (and the House) who have become incapacitated, and who have not resigned, have generally served out their terms of office.

Your arguments might be more compelling if you stopped substituting fantasy for reality.

BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 06:31 pm
@firefly,
Poor Firefly does not had a clue as how Constitution law work and yet she is so sure at the same time.

It is amusing as once more the constitution clearly give the chambers the power to set their own standards for removing a member and all that is needed is 2/3 vote.

If is was other while there would be a listings of the reasons in details for removing a member and there is not.


It is completely up to the chambers and no one else.

Quote:
Under the general practice and operations in the Senate (as well as in the House), personal "incapacity" of a sitting Member has not generated proceedings to declare the seat vacant, and sitting Members of the Senate (and the House) who have become incapacitated, and who have not resigned, have generally served out their terms of office.


The about statement does not even imply that they do not have the power to change the general practices as once more it it completely up to the two chambers.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Jan, 2012 06:59 pm
@BillRM,
http://www.videogameologists.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Youre-dumb.jpg

With posts like yours, I know why someone tagged this thread
"humor". Laughing
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 10:42:24