BTW Perri, the history of the second amendment does include the idea that it would allow the citizenry to throw off an oppressive regime. Considering that the last time a Third George and a supposedly representative parliament refused to respond to the demands of the people there was a revolution, people in Washington need to look at a history book. GW is the third president named George and hence could be considered George the Third, and the Senate is certainly acting like they think they’re the House of Lords. Thomas Jefferson did say that a country needs a revolution every couple of hundred years.

I feel sorry for Arizonans having John McCain as their Senator. I especially feel sorry for the nation if he ever becomes President.

Arizona’s Republican Party needs to get a real conservative to run against John McCain in the next primary. I notice on his Senate website he calls it “My Arizona”. I guess he figures it doesn’t belong to the citizens.

Your best recourse if you want to eliminate Senators you don’t like is to vote them out when they’re up for re-election. It’ll be tough with McCain’s incumbent protection act (also known as campaign finance reform, or McCain-Feingold).

Why is it that whenever that particular man gets involved in “reform” legislation it’s bad for the country?

Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason…

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Voting for a bad bill hardly constitutes treason under that definition.

I followed that link. There may be some question about whether a recall is possible, but there is no constitutionally outlined mechanism for it. The idea that the 17th amendment grants the legislature the power to set up a recall election is a bit of a stretch.

Rep. Fallin’s contention that it does based on the words “Provided That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments” is a very thin basis. The full text of that clause reads.
“When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.”

In other words, the executive is supposed to call for a new election when a “vacancy” occurs. The legislature can change that to allow the appointment of a replacement. This does not give the legislature the power to allow a recall.

Before the 17th amendment the legistlature was required to choose the senators. Even then, there was no provision for a recall.

The case of Senator Blount is interesting because even though the procedure used to oust him was Impeachment, it still required a two-thirds vote in the Senate to convict him. His appeal established a solid precedent, but by convicting him in the first place before his appeal the Senate which obviously found that he had committed the acts for which he was impeached. The Senate still had the option of expelling him by the same 2/3 vote that convicted him. It probably should have done so.

Here is a link showing that you may be able to recall our elected officials. This would be an interesting topic!