Miller "I'm Not Talkin'" (Anchorage, Fairbanks: residency, money, required)

[RayinAK]

Ah, I understand. I should have said a draft or a bill, not a bill that has already been enacted as a law.

Craig Campbell, Lieutenant Governor of Alaska
§ 14. Passage of Bills
The legislature shall establish the procedure for enactment of bills into law. No bill may become law unless it has passed three readings in each house on three separate days, except that any bill may be advanced from second to third reading on the same day by concurrence of three-fourths of the house considering it. No bill may become law without an affirmative vote of a majority of the membership of each house. The yeas and nays on final passage shall be entered in the journal.

§ 15. Veto
The governor may veto bills passed by the legislature. He may, by veto, strike or reduce items in appropriation bills. He shall return any vetoed bill, with a statement of his objections, to the house of origin.

§ 16. Action Upon Veto
Upon receipt of a veto message during a regular session of the legislature, the legislature shall meet immediately in joint session and reconsider passage of the vetoed bill or item. Bills to raise revenue and appropriation bills or items, although vetoed, become law by affirmative vote of three-fourths of the membership of the legislature. Other vetoed bills become law by affirmative vote of two-thirds of the membership of the legislature. Bills vetoed after adjournment of the first regular session of the legislature shall be reconsidered by the legislature sitting as one body no later than the fifth day of the next regular or special session of that legislature. Bills vetoed after adjournment of the second regular session shall be reconsidered by the legislature sitting as one body no later than the fifth day of a special session of that legislature, if one is called. The vote on reconsideration of a vetoed bill shall be entered on the journals of both houses. [Amended 1976]

[warptman]

miller is still a dumb@ss...

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by Floyd_Davidson

You are still claiming that Congress should attempt to pass an unconstitutional law. That is stupid stupid stupid.


Ray, get the kid next door to read what you posted. Hint: It says NOTHING about vetoing laws. That is because the governor cannot just up and veto a law. Only the Judiciary Branch can do that. If they say a law, or even a part of a law, is unconstitutional it has been vetoed. The executive branch can ignore a law and at least to some degree that vetoes it, but not effectively. The Congress and the Executive Branches together of course can veto a law by passing another one that counters the first, but that requires both branches to accomplish the fact. Alone, only the Judiciary can veto a law.

Let me point something out to you. Here is what you quoted:

"§ 15. Veto

The governor may veto bills passed by the legislature. He may, by veto, strike or reduce items in appropriation bills. He shall return any vetoed bill, with a statement of his objections, to the house of origin."

See where it is titled "Veto"? That is because it specifically is exclusively about the power of the governor to veto. Now, see where it says "law", or anything that means a law? Look carefully. Right! It says nothing at all about vetoing laws because the governor cannot veto a law.

Idjits that don't realize that bills are not laws can vote??? Why do we allow that?

I am an illegal alien, and can vote Also, if you can vote on "your perceptions," I should be able to vote. Don't you think so?

[RayinAK]

By the way, Floyd,

I am going to see if you can figure where the mix-up about "bill and law began"

1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Whisperer
That statement is illogical. Voting for someone when you already have advanced warning of his questionable ethics simply belies a flawed decision making process. Why would you install someone in office knowing you'll just have to replace him again in six years?


No, Congress will not enact term limits because they are unconstitutional. Once again, the so called constitutionalists are clueless. The founders wrote the constitution specifically without term limits - because we already have term limits, they are called elections. You simply wish to limit people's choices. We are constantly forced to endure Miller's preachings on "original intent". Well, term limits aren't a part of that. So which version of the constitution do you guys really espouse?
1. Republican voters have two choices: one has been corrupt for about eight years, while there is a possibility that the other one may be. In this case, I choose the lesser of two evils. In previous elections I voted for Lisa as the lesser of two evils, too.

2.What branch of Government drafts the laws of the land under the Constitution? Congress? The fact is that the members of Congress could create a law for term limits if they wanted to. The same can be said of the AK legislature, except that in this case such a law would only apply to Alaska. That said, in AK the President could veto such a US law if for whatever reason it's Unconstitutional (for example), and the same for the governor of AK in relation to the State.

Quote:
THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
CONGRESS
Congress is made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Their job is to make the laws for our country.
By the way, I posted that link just so Bush can ask you, "do you miss me yet?"
[+] Rate this post positively

and 2.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Whisperer
That statement is illogical. Voting for someone when you already have advanced warning of his questionable ethics simply belies a flawed decision making process. Why would you install someone in office knowing you'll just have to replace him again in six years?


No, Congress will not enact term limits because they are unconstitutional. Once again, the so called constitutionalists are clueless. The founders wrote the constitution specifically without term limits - because we already have term limits, they are called elections. You simply wish to limit people's choices. We are constantly forced to endure Miller's preachings on "original intent". Well, term limits aren't a part of that. So which version of the constitution do you guys really espouse?
1. Republican voters have two choices: one has been corrupt for about eight years, while there is a possibility that the other one may be. In this case, I choose the lesser of two evils. In previous elections I voted for Lisa as the lesser of two evils, too.

2.What branch of Government drafts the laws of the land under the Constitution? Congress? The fact is that the members of Congress could create a law for term limits if they wanted to. The same can be said of the AK legislature, except that in this case such a law would only apply to Alaska. That said, in AK the President could veto such a US law if for whatever reason it's Unconstitutional (for example), and the same for the governor of AK in relation to the State.

Quote:
THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
CONGRESS
Congress is made up of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Their job is to make the laws for our country.
By the way, I posted that link just so Bush can ask you, "do you miss me yet?"

--
The two above are Moose and I arguing about Congress creating a law for term limits, and this is when you stepped-in: 3.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RayinAK
What branch of Government drafts the laws of the land under the Constitution? Congress? The fact is that the members of Congress could create a law for term limits if they wanted to. The same can be said of the AK legislature, except that in this case such a law would only apply to Alaska. That said, in AK the governor could veto such a law if for whatever reason it's Unconstitutional (for example), and the same for the governor of AK.
Yes Congress can pass all the unconstitutional laws they like, but the Supreme Court is sitting there throwing them out just as fast. What sort of stupidity is it to say that Congress should pass any such unconstitutional laws???

And no the Governor cannot "veto such a law". Once it is a law the Governor cannot veto it. The Governor might find ways to ignore a law, but only the courts can "veto" a law.

Civics is actually a fun subject, though I do understand you needed your beauty sleep back when you took that course...
[+] Rate this post positively

And you are correct about my screw-up.

[Floyd_Davidson]

Originally Posted by AKSteveB

I
1) To use the hiring analogy, Lisa is a candidate with industry experience, a mediocre record, nothing to get real excited about, but no absolute showstoppers.

I'm impressed, because that article was actually very good, and certainly valid. I would point out however that your evaluation of Murkowski is not up to the level of the rest of the article.

There are two sides to a Congress critter. One is voting, the other is the ability to get things done (effectiveness). The second actually should be broken down into two parts, effectiveness within the legislative body and effectiveness outside the legislative body.

Granted that can be a little fuzzy because sometimes the boundaries are not there. For example if we look at this business of the Native corporations and 8(A) status, we can see that our US Senator should be expected by every Alaskan to protect the basis of 8(A) from legislative attack by other Senators (i.e., the Senator needs to be effective within the Senate) and also the Senator needs to use the influence of a US Senator to protect 8(A) status in political circles and also by influencing Native corporations.

There are of course many other areas of equal importance. National health care being one of them, but of particular interests to Alaskans is the Indian Health Service that compacts with Tribal health organizations. Another is to massage all ends of the spectrum about both protecting the environment and developing Alaska's natural resources. Oll exploration on the North Slope, the Pebble Mine, Subsistence Priority for Federal and State management of fish and game, and North Pacific fisheries management treaties are all very good examples. Most of what a US Senator does in regard to those issues is unrelated to any Senate votes. Much of it is unrelated to actual legislation for that matter.

Now, back to Lisa Murkowski... from my perspective the absolute worst thing about her is her horrible partisan voting record in the US Senate. I do understand that it has helped her gain significant political power, and I do approve of that. But do you realize that she votes with the Republican Leadership more often than Don Young does? (She's 82+ percent, Young is 81+ percent.) Both of them are disgusting in that respect from my point of view. (You should be tickled pink with Lisa Murkowski though!)

But frankly what has persuaded me to support Lisa Murkowski is her effectiveness as a US Senator when her constituents go to her for help. I am aware that she had become, even before Ted Stevens left the Senate, the goto Senator for Alaskans in many areas. It just boggles the mind that Lisa Murkowski with less that six years of seniority was managing to equal Uncle Ted in effectiveness. And you can believe that Uncle Ted was exceedingly aware of it, and happy to finally have a Murkowski that was helpful!

The effect is that just as I've voted with my teeth gritted for Stevens and Young because they are effective, I'm also going to vote for Lisa Murkowski for exactly the same reason. And I cannot imagine how anyone could believe that Joe Miller would ever hold a candle to Lisa Murkowski.

[Floyd_Davidson]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

The two above are Moose and I arguing about Congress creating a law for term limits, and this is when you stepped-in: 3.

The two above were just one.

And you are correct about my screw-up.

That should be plural. Your many screw-ups are legion.

[Floyd_Davidson]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

I am an illegal alien, and can vote Also, if you can vote on "your perceptions," I should be able to vote. Don't you think so?

I think Warptman got it right about Miller. Guess what I think of people who'd strap a monkey like that to our backs for the next 6 years. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

[warptman]

Alaska doesn't need him and his warts...

[AADAD]

People are combing over the files ordered released by the court. should be interesting to see what if anything they contain....

[RedJacket]

I think its safe to say Ben Stein doesn't think highly of Joe Miller.

Ben Stein: Good Old Tail-Gunner Joe Miller