Kerry and Edwards need to resign the Senate

[qwerty]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

[MODU]

If I understand the law correctly, don't they have to resign from the Senate once they accept the nomination at the convention?

[JohnFKennedy]

If I understand the law correctly, don't they have to resign from the Senate once they accept the nomination at the convention?

I am not sure, did Lieberman? I don't think he did.......

[MODU]

Well, if it isn't, it should be.

[Wakie]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

You know there's a certain amount of irony here.  Your namesake, Richard Nixon, didn't resign from the Senate in 1952 when he was running for the Vice-Presidency.

Oh, and in 1964 Barry Goldwater didn't resign from the Senate.

[minionofmidas]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

You know there's a certain amount of irony here.  Your namesake, Richard Nixon, didn't resign from the Senate in 1952 when he was running for the Vice-Presidency.

Oh, and in 1964 Barry Goldwater didn't resign from the Senate.

There is no such law, and nobody ever does. And I don't see the point of such a law either.
And the joke of candidates' presence in the office they still hold is about as old as American elective politics. If not older.

[stry_cat]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

You know there's a certain amount of irony here.  Your namesake, Richard Nixon, didn't resign from the Senate in 1952 when he was running for the Vice-Presidency.

Oh, and in 1964 Barry Goldwater didn't resign from the Senate.

There is no such law, and nobody ever does. And I don't see the point of such a law either.
And the joke of candidates' presence in the office they still hold is about as old as American elective politics. If not older.

Bob Dole did and I think it was a huge mistake for him.

[© tweed]

If I understand the law correctly, don't they have to resign from the Senate once they accept the nomination at the convention?

I tihnk they have to resign by Jan. 6.

[Wakie]

You know there's a certain amount of irony here.  Your namesake, Richard Nixon, didn't resign from the Senate in 1952 when he was running for the Vice-Presidency.

He did not. However, he also didn't miss 2/3 of votes this year like Kerry ahs.

If it makes you feel better, move to Mass and vote against him.

[MAS117]

If anyone Dennis should, and if they get the victory they will, plus Edwards is out of the Senate after this term. Kerry won't resign and let a GOPer take this seat.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If I understand the law correctly, don't they have to resign from the Senate once they accept the nomination at the convention?

I tihnk they have to resign by Jan. 6.

Jan. 6 is the day the Congress counts the electoral college votes by law, so since the result won't be official until then at the earliest that would be sensible, but I'd be surprised if the law requires resigning any other office at a specific point in time befor ebeing inaugurated.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

Umm, who cares? By not being there, they implicity voted against closure, and that failed by 12 votes. Only 48 were voting for closure. 67 are needed to pass a constitutional amendment. Kerry and Edwards being there wouldn't have changed a damn thing.

[khirkhib]

I learned recently that on one ocassion Kerry flew into Washington to vote on vetrens benefits bill but was denied the opportunity.  

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/22/kerry.senate.vote/

Kerry frustrated by GOP-postponed vote

Tuesday, June 22, 2004 Posted: 11:10 PM EDT (0310 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. John Kerry jumped off the presidential campaign trail Tuesday so he could vote for a measure funding health care benefits for veterans -- only to watch Republican leaders postpone the vote.

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee denounced their move as "politics at its silliest."

For the past month, GOP leaders have engaged in political gamesmanship with Kerry over his dual roles as senator and candidate.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, charged that Tuesday's delay -- on a proposed Democratic amendment to a defense spending bill to fund veterans' health care -- was but the latest example.

Republicans insisted that they delayed the vote because a time agreement had not yet been reached with Democrats for debate on the defense bill.

But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, noted that he was not happy about Kerry -- who has missed about 80 percent of the Senate's floor votes during his presidential campaign -- deciding to "parachute" in to vote on the veterans' issue.

Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, has made an appeal to veterans a major point of his campaign, and he has criticized the Bush administration for not adequately funding benefits and health care for veterans.

Anticipating Tuesday's vote, he canceled several campaign events in New Mexico and returned to the capital to wait for the roll call that never came.

"It's politics at its silliest," he told CNN. "It speaks for itself."

Last month, a proposal to extend unemployment benefits to jobless Americans -- which Democrats had championed for months -- fell one vote short of passage, while Kerry was campaigning in Kentucky.

President Bush's re-election campaign jumped on the missed vote, saying Kerry was "too busy playing politics" to do his job.

But Kerry accused Republicans of "playing a game," saying one of the 11 GOP senators who voted for the measure would have switched sides to defeat it if he had been there to vote for it.

Then, last week, another Democratic proposal to make war profiteering a crime failed by two votes. Kerry was in the Capitol just a short distance from the floor at a meeting, but he did not vote.

A senior Democratic aide said he had made a decision not to cast votes unless absolutely necessary to prevent Republicans from engineering close votes to highlight his absences.

GOP aides conceded that even if Kerry had voted for the war profiteering measure, Republicans would have switched their votes to make sure it failed anyway.

The two top Republicans in Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, Gov. Mitt Romney and Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, have called on Kerry to resign his seat, saying he wasn't adequately representing the state in the Senate.

Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, who resigned his Kansas seat to run for president in 1996, also said he thinks Kerry should consider that step.

But Kerry has rejected those suggestions, insisting that he is serving his constituents.

Democrats also note that if he were to resign, Romney would get to appoint his replacement, although the Massachusetts Legislature is considering a bill to strip the governor of that power and fill the post with a special election.

[ATFFL]

I learned recently that on one ocassion Kerry flew into Washington to vote on vetrens benefits bill but was denied the opportunity.  

He was not denied the opportunity at all.  If it meant enough to him he could have stayed for the vote the next day.

Sticking around for teh vote would have been a huge plus for him.  It would have shown an actual core belief for once.  The delay could have backfired huge on the GOP if Kerry was willing to truly stand up for the issue.

[Posterity]

Shouldn't the people of Massachusetts and North Carolina decide for themselves whether or not they are being adequately represented in the Senate?


Funny how no one is questioning whether or not the campaigning activities of George W. Bush are interfering with his duties as the sitting President.  Maybe he should resign the Presidency while he campaigns for re-election.

[MODU]

Kerry only cares about himself.  If he's so upset on missing this one vote (which have discussed before), then why wasn't he upset the other 66% of the time when votes were up and he was a no-show?  Hmmmm . . .

[khirkhib]

Because most of the votes were safe.  

Lets break this down to its logical parts and we have discussed this so many times here that I hope we can drop it soon.  I'm just going to phrase the statement once for Kerry but the same applies for Edwards

Statement:

John Kerry should resign because he isn't serving his constituency as a US Senator by participating in votes and discussion at the US Senate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The statement however has many weaknesses.

1. Are John Kerry's constituents dissatisified with John Kerry's service?

2. Is John Kerry not doing his job by not participating in votes?

The Senate as a whole has many duties and responsibilities. Some of these include writing and passing laws, approving many presidential appointments, and ratifying treaties with other countries. In addition, individual Senators play many roles. These roles include being official members of the government, representing the people that elected them, and being members of a political party

The role of a senator isn't just about voting because senators also have other roles.  One of those roles right now is running for President.  And we can assume that he is putting together legislation right now for implementation when he becomes president.

3.  Would John Kerry be able to do the job of voting?

I'm hoping you don't think that John Kerry doesn't have to sit in the hall of senate 8 hours a day.  Most of the senators do not spend most of their time in their and generally go in for the important votes.  Since the time of the vote is easily changable they could push an important vote back for days if Kerry did come in to vote for it so the only way for Kerry to be able to come into vote would be if he did not campaign.

I'm sure you would be psyched if Kerry did not campaign at all but his constituents would not be so by not campaigning he wouldn't be doing his job either.  

And you would also be happy if he resigned but he would be replaced by republican and would be hurting his cause  and his constiuents wouldn't be happy.  

So really the only thing that he can do to keep his constituents and the people that are going to vote for him to become President is to stay in the senate.  So no he shouldn't resign.  Yes he is doing his job.  Just like Bush is doing his job by campaigning because he is promoting his agenda meeting people and creating legislation.  

So please let this idiotic debate cease.

[qwerty]

Funny how no one is questioning whether or not the campaigning activities of George W. Bush are interfering with his duties as the sitting President.  Maybe he should resign the Presidency while he campaigns for re-election.

He can perform (and is) the presidential duties from anywhere in the country. A Senator, however, can only vote at the Capitol.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I learned recently that on one ocassion Kerry flew into Washington to vote on vetrens benefits bill but was denied the opportunity.  

He was not denied the opportunity at all.  If it meant enough to him he could have stayed for the vote the next day.

Sticking around for teh vote would have been a huge plus for him.  It would have shown an actual core belief for once.  The delay could have backfired huge on the GOP if Kerry was willing to truly stand up for the issue.

The GOP could have delayed it another day.

[dazzleman]

There is nothing requiring Kerry and Edward to resign the Senate.

Bob Dole did resign in June 1996 to make his presidential run.  He was probably ready to retire anyway if he didn't win the White House, so it probably worked out OK for him.

Joe Lieberman not only didn't resign the Senate, but ran for re-election to the Senate simultaneously with his vice presidential run.  Lyndon Johnson did the same thing in 1960 in Texas.

While I don't think a person should have to resign from one office to run for another, I don't think anybody should be able to run for 2 offices at the same time.  There is something inherently dishonest about that, since he will only be able to do one job.

In most of these offices, especially legislative ones, the bulk of the day-to-day work can be done by others, at least for a while.  Sometimes it's better if government officials don't do their jobs for a while - it gives them fewer opportunities to mess things up.

[ATFFL]

I learned recently that on one ocassion Kerry flew into Washington to vote on vetrens benefits bill but was denied the opportunity.  

He was not denied the opportunity at all.  If it meant enough to him he could have stayed for the vote the next day.

Sticking around for teh vote would have been a huge plus for him.  It would have shown an actual core belief for once.  The delay could have backfired huge on the GOP if Kerry was willing to truly stand up for the issue.

The GOP could have delayed it another day.

And Kerry could stay.  Any longer delay would have been damaging to the GOP.  A longer delay would also strengthen the image that Kerry had some core values.  

[CARLHAYDEN]

The only two Senators not to vote in the Gay Marriage roll call yesterday...

They have their priorities... are they yours?

You know there's a certain amount of irony here.  Your namesake, Richard Nixon, didn't resign from the Senate in 1952 when he was running for the Vice-Presidency.

Oh, and in 1964 Barry Goldwater didn't resign from the Senate.

There is no such law, and nobody ever does. And I don't see the point of such a law either.
And the joke of candidates' presence in the office they still hold is about as old as American elective politics. If not older.

True, there is no law.

Also, I see no need for resignations.

However, Dole DID resign from the Senate to run for President.  While I do not particularly like Dole, he's not quite "nobody."

[Posterity]

Funny how no one is questioning whether or not the campaigning activities of George W. Bush are interfering with his duties as the sitting President.  Maybe he should resign the Presidency while he campaigns for re-election.

He can perform (and is) the presidential duties from anywhere in the country. A Senator, however, can only vote at the Capitol.

I was being facetious with the Bush comment.  Anyway, if I was a resident of MA or NC, I wouldn't be too concerned if one of my Senators didn't participate in a debate and a vote on whether or not to continue debating an issue.

The missed vote was not on the amendment itself, but on cloture -- whether or not to continue debating the issue.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

2 votes wouldn't change anything in 2/3 of the Senate votes anyway.  This is a lame attack on the canidates.