|
Grex > Agora35 > #131: Steinem on Nader? A perspective worth considering. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 13 new of 56 responses total. |
wh
|
|
response 44 of 56:
| 
Nov 12 22:59 UTC 2000 |
From Infoplease online, Reps deleted:
The House of Representatives
In the following lists, the numeral indicates the Congressional
District represented; AL is for representatives At Large. All terms
expire January 2001. Mailing address: House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C. 20515. NOTE: As of July 31, 1999.
R D split
25 21 4
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont (I)
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Vermont is Independent but usually votes with Democrats on
House organization votes. I don't know if the split delegations
would vote 1/2 vote each or just not have a vote.
|
brighn
|
|
response 45 of 56:
|
Nov 13 00:12 UTC 2000 |
I would imagine the split delegations would have to decide how to vote, and
vote. They'd get one vote. It sounds like, to get that majority, the Reps
would only have to get one of those four split states to vote for Bush. that
wouldn't be that difficult, I imagine... IL might be difficult, but AK or NV
should be easy.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 46 of 56:
|
Nov 13 02:10 UTC 2000 |
Re #41 and #42: After posting, I remembered the "advise and consent" bit.
My comments on terms "expiring" were based on their serving "at the will of
the President." Yes, I can see a new President asking the current Cabinet
members to continue to serve until their replacements are confirmed by the
Senate. So I was wrong; the Congress *could* use the existing succession
to choose the interim President.
|
carson
|
|
response 47 of 56:
|
Nov 13 04:48 UTC 2000 |
resp:43 (D.C. [or one of the other whatchamacall'ems] would be the 51st
vote, I'd imagine.)
|
brighn
|
|
response 48 of 56:
|
Nov 13 04:50 UTC 2000 |
As far as I can tell, DC doesn't GET a vote. It doesn't have any Reps.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 49 of 56:
|
Nov 13 04:52 UTC 2000 |
Nope; DC does not have representation in the Congress. They get three votes
in the Electoral College, but none in the House and Senate.
I wonder if Guam's representative gets to vote on these matters?
|
polygon
|
|
response 50 of 56:
|
Nov 13 17:40 UTC 2000 |
Re 49. No vote for Guam. D.C. gets to vote for president because of a
specific constitutional amendment.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 51 of 56:
|
Nov 13 21:14 UTC 2000 |
I meant in the House, not in the Electoral College, Larry. I *know*
DC gets representation in the EC; I don't *think* it has representation
in the House. Guam has representation in the House but not in the EC.
Does Puerto Rico have representation in the House?
(Trivia note: Guam's first Representative was also the first Guamian to
achieve flag rank: He was a Brigadier General at Quantico when I served
there.)
|
bruin
|
|
response 52 of 56:
|
Nov 14 00:23 UTC 2000 |
Also, D.C. residents pay Federal taxes even without a vote in Congress,
hence the slogan "Taxation Without Representation" on their new license
plates.
|
polygon
|
|
response 53 of 56:
|
Nov 14 04:39 UTC 2000 |
Re 51-52. American Samoa, D.C., Guam, and the Virgin Islands each get a
non-voting Delegate in the U.S. House. Puerto Rico gets a non-voting
Resident Commissioner, which is essentially the same thing.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 54 of 56:
|
Nov 14 04:43 UTC 2000 |
Thanks, Larry. :)
|
polygon
|
|
response 55 of 56:
|
Nov 14 05:12 UTC 2000 |
I think the non-voting reps ARE authorized to vote in the committees to
which they are appointed, so they are not completely powerless. Indeed, I
can imagine that voting power in committee may be more important than
voting power on the floor of the House.
Of course, none of these areas has any representation whatever in the
Senate.
|
brighn
|
|
response 56 of 56:
|
Nov 15 23:58 UTC 2000 |
#53> I'll bet all those are feeling pretty glad right about now that they
DON'T get electors, don't have to put up with this mess. ;}
|