WAHOO!!! Election Postponement Shot Down!, page 1

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:16 PM

link

This is great news! The house has passed a resolution that says the election can not be postponed this year!

www.billingsgazette.com

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House said Thursday it will not back any efforts to postpone this year's presidential elections due to terrorist threats or attacks.

Lawmakers voted 419-2 in support of a congressional resolution from Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, that also says no agency or individual should be given the authority to postpone the date of a national election, which will be held this year on Nov. 2.

The House action comes after the chairman of a federal commission on voting suggested to congressional leaders last week that there should be a process for canceling or rescheduling an election interrupted by terrorism. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice has said the administration is considering no such plan.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

[edit on 7/22/2004 by lockheed]

[edit on 7/22/2004 by lockheed]

TrickmastertricK

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:18 PM

link

My only concern is if the Patriot Act could come into play. I have not looked into this at any depth, but putting it out there. BTW who were the 2 that voted for it?
Goerge and Dick???

marg6043

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:20 PM

link

TextMy only concern is if the Patriot Act could come into play.

I thought the patriot act has not power over the congress or I am mistaken.

[edit on 22-7-2004 by marg6043]

JacKatMtn

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:25 PM

link

Sorry to burst your bubble but this action by the house does not mean that the election won't be postponed it merely states that the House of Representatives
doesn't think it is a good idea.......

Unlike a bill, a House resolution is not binding and does not have the force of law. It merely expresses the sentiment of members of the House.

The two congressmen who voted against the resolution were Reps. Brian Baird, D-Wash., and Scott McInnis, R-Colo. Thirteen lawmakers didn't vote on the measure.

[edit on 22-7-2004 by JacKatMtn]

TrickmastertricK

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:29 PM

link

This is the first thing I found, Im not huge on this site, but you have to make your own minds up

Prison Planet

Political analyst Al Martin writes that the legal mechanism and contingency plan for canceling US elections is already in place.

"The contingency plan in question is the Continuity-Of-Government plan (COG), first drafted in 1949 under the Truman regime shortly after the Soviet Union detonated its first atomic weapon," Martin explains.

In addition to COG, "Bush has this power under Patriot I Act with the expansion of his authority under the War Powers Act of 1947, since, it should be remembered, a declared state of national emergency already exists in the United States at present," Martin writes in his column, "Canceling US Elections: It�s Easier Than You Think."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

PRNationalist

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:32 PM

link

It is a shame that this topic would even be discussed in Congress. First the "emergency war powers", then the "USA PATRIOT ACT", now the threat to postpone national elections? How absurd must this regime become before it is formally recognized as a dictatorship by the international community?

lockheed

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:34 PM

link

That excellent prison planet article goes on to say that the legislation that Bush is pushing for would enable him to postpone elections indefinately, so this being shot down is still a big deal, especially by such a huge margin!

Gools

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:38 PM

link

Originally posted by JacKatMtn

Unlike a bill, a House resolution is not binding and does not have the force of law. It merely expresses the sentiment of members of the House.

Agreed.

And who is to say nothing will ever change their minds anyway? It's not unheard of for politicians to say one thing then do another.

loam

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 09:41 PM

link

As close as this race is, are you sure postponement is not a better option? What if there is a massive terrorist attack only in a heavily concentrated republican or democratic city/state? Be careful for what you wish for...

Seems to me this issue needs futher consideration.

[edit on 22-7-2004 by loam]

Indy

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 10:24 PM

link

Congress was so concerned about gays and marriage. Perhaps they should pass an amendment to the constitution making it illegal for any branch of government to postpone the election for any reason.

Now if the election does get postponed without an immediate establishment of a new date I will consider this an act of war against this country by the government and so should everyone else. God forbid something bad was to happen and you absolutely had to postpone the election you better be setting a new date right away or it must be considered a move toward a dictatorship. And I promise that will not be looked kindly upon.

loam

posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 10:41 PM

link

Think about it folks....If you were truly paranoid and conspiracy minded, wouldn�t a system PREVENTING postponement make it easier to tamper with election outcomes? Many areas are overwhelmingly concentrated as either conservative or liberal. If you want to impact the outcome in a �come hell or high water� election, wouldn�t this be an obvious vulnerability?