Recall of Mary Landrieu

[Ruben]

There are those who do not believe that it can be done, and therefore a waste of time.

I will address there argument point by point.

Point 1: There is no authority for the voters in a state or a state legislature to recall a sitting member of Congress. The United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 5, has been interpreted to vest exclusive control over members of Congress to the respective houses in which they serve. The expulsion clause has been viewed as the only mechanism by which a sitting member’s term may constitutionally be cut short. Article 1, Section 5 of the U.S. Constitution reads in pertinent part:
“Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns, and Qualifications of its own Members...Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.”

ANSWER: What is the meaning of; “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections,Returns, and Qualifications of its own Members? This is answered in Article 1, Section 3, paragraph 5; The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

For the Qualifications part see the You Tube link for Al Frankin’s swearing in Ceremony.

Basically they vote on their own officers, they publish the vote and based on the qualifications (if the individual Senators wins their own election in their own home state and be certified by their own Secretary of State; then they are seated).

When the Senate, ” punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour“, what happens?

Only 15 Senators have been expelled; William Blount in 1797 for treason and 14 others in the Civil war. Some resigned, like Bob Packwood.

These Senators were deemed to have broken the codes of conduct of the Senate, like every employer instructs their employees on acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.

No Supreme Court Has ever ruled on the RECALL-ABILITY of a sitting US Senator or US Congressman. Until that is done, everyone saying NAY, is just an opinion and no more.

Point 2: The X (10th) Amendment of the Constitution does not allow for the recall of US Congressmen or US Senators.

In Lamar v. United States, 241 U.S. 103, 36 S.Ct. 535, 60 L.Ed. 912 (1915), the United States Supreme Court held that a member of the United States House of representatives is an officer acting under the authority of the United States. Lamar, 241 U.S. at 113. Other jurisdictions have commonly reached a similar conclusion: “There can be no doubt that a member of Congress is not, strictly speaking, a state officer. He does not represent the state, but represents the people of the United States in the district from which he is elected. He is a United States officer.”

ANSWER: He represents the people of the United States in the district from which he is elected. The United States Sovereignty comes from the Individual States, the Individual States Sovereignty comes from the Sovereign Citizens of that State. Yes, he represents the “people of the United States”, but prior to that he must belong to a sovereign state, and to be eligible to occupy that office he must be a citizen of that state, and as a sovereign citizen of that state he is elected or reject by fellow citizens of that sovereign state. Bottom line: No Sovereign Citizens, no Sovereign States, no Sovereign States no United States Sovereignty.

Point 3: The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the Tenth Amendment as a source of State power to regulate what is an area of governance that is exclusively reserved to each House of Congress. In U.S. Term Limits, Inc., supra, Bobbie E. Hill filed suit in Arkansas state court challenging the constitutionality of § 3 of Amendment 73 to the Arkansas Constitution, which prohibited the name of an otherwise-eligible candidate for Congress from appearing on the general election ballot if that candidate has already served three terms in the House of Representatives or two terms in the Senate. Hill also alleged that the states possess control over qualifications for members of Congress as part of the original powers reserved to them by the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court rejected Hill’s argument.

Justice Stevens wrote, 514 U.S. at 802:
Contrary to petitioners’ assertions, the power to add qualifications is not part of the original powers of sovereignty that the Tenth Amendment reserved to the States. Petitioners’ Tenth Amendment argument misconceives the nature of the right at issue because that Amendment could only “reserve” that which existed before. As Justice Story recognized, “the states can exercise no powers whatsoever, which exclusively spring out of the existence of the national government, which the constitution does not delegate to them…. No state can say, that it has reserved, what it never possessed.” 1 Story § 627.

ANSWER: The Supreme Court is correct in striking down an Arkansas Law to limit US Congress and US Senate terms of office. The Law attempted to control something it had no right to control in the first place. If the law changes, it must come from the houses themselves. The 10th Amendment is very clear: powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, these are rights and privileges that our founding fathers had no way of knowing about in advance, (like regulating the internet): nor prohibited by it to the States, these are things that the states do not want the citizens to engage in, (like prostitution); are reserved to the states respectively: something set aside for a specific purpose (like intrastate commerce); or to the people; something that is not specifically put under the federal government’s jurisdiction, nor is outlawed by the state is set aside to the sovereign citizens of that state.

Point 4: Article X of the Constitution of the State of Louisiana does not allow for the recall of US Congressmen or US Senators.

Article X of the Constitution of the State of Louisiana of 1974 addresses Public Officials and Employees. Section 26 (Recall) states:

The legislature shall provide by general law for the recall by election of any state, district, parochial, ward, or municipal official except judges of the courts of record. The sole issue at a recall election shall be whether the official shall be recalled. La. R.S. 18:1300.1 et seq., set forth the laws authorizing recalls. R.S. 18:1300.1 states in pertinent part: Any public officer, excepting judges of the courts of record, may be recalled in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.

ANSWER: Article X of the Constitution of the State of Louisiana does not allow for the recall of US Congressmen or US Senators. This is correct, but in the same way it does not “prohibit” a recall of US Congressmen or US Senators or US Speaker of the House or US President pro tempore or US Vice President or US President. The phrase “{ states in pertinent part: Any public officer, excepting judges of the courts of record, may be recalled in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.}” is added in and should be ignored.

Point 5: The United States Constitution does not give you the right to petition or recall federally elected officials.

ANSWER: Yes it does. Specifically the 1st Amendment clearly states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Also, the 17th Amendment: 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. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures…

Elected by the people, this was put in place on April 8, 1913; so the Federal Reserve Act would passed Congress at 1:30 A.M. December 24, 1913 on a mostly partisan basis 46 to 23, with most all Democrats in support and most Republicans against it. This was done so the individual state Legislatures would not recall them, for what they were about to do to the country. They figuring that it would be much harder for a recall to take place where citizens had to gather signatures. That’s why they wanted to be Elected by the people.

Therefore, WE ELECT THEM, WE CORRECT THEM!

Moon, We have started the recall process against Mary Landrieu at MoveOnMary.org
The La. Attorney General claims that we are not allowed to collect signatures. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how wrong it may be. The N.J. Attorney General (R) believes that it is legal for citizens to recall US Congressmen & US Senators. Someone is wrong. I have carefully answered every concern that was posed. Also this is the biggest single issue uniting the Tea Parties, 912 project, Ron Paul people, Campaign for Liberty, and a host of others. Even Daid Vitters acknowledged that a recall petition is going on.