Hucka-miracle

Could be... Only way to find out is to sue McCain... My two cents, if it was good enough to keep A. Hamilton out it's good enough for lesser statesmen too. (And yes, I am explicitly saying that Hamilton is a higher level of statesmen than John McCain. Go ahead, argue that one.)

In other news, if you've nothing better to do today, call the mint and complain at them for rejecting DC's US quarter design... For some reason the rallying cry of the revolution, "taxation without representation" is seen as "too controversial" to put on the money. Seriously?

Comments

[B. Minich]

Dane, you must not live here. Around these parts, that slogan is quite controversial. DC has taken it up as a mantra for representation in Congress, representation that Congress doesn't want to give up.

Basically, both solutions for this problem upset important people. Republicans don't want a new state that is sure to have 2 Democratic Senators elected for a small population. The other major suggestion, "retrocession" (the name given to having Maryland take back DC), angers Maryland Democrats (the dominant party here in the state), primarily those in the Baltimore machine - the last thing Baltimore wants is to have the state totally go under the control of DC interests - they already have to put up with enough competition with the DC suburbs for the state they once dominated.

Anyway, I know why this is a problem. I disagree with the mint's stance, but I understand it - it reminds all the players around here about the problem that no one wants to deal with.

[Gardner]

So if you are a military family. Make sure you never have your kids while stationed overseas protecting this country because your kids will not be natural-born citizens.

However, if you are a mexican family, you can illegally cross the border, give birth to a child on US soil, and maybe someday s/he can be president.

[David K.]

As far as I'm concerned if you are born to American parents and have only American citizenship, especially if its on a military base or embassy which ARE American soil, then you should have every right to run for the presidency.

[dcl]

David, I do recognize that, I'm just causing trouble. McCain is in a grey area for sure in terms of the constitutional provision. In all likelihood comes down in his favor--especially given the current supreme court make up.

B, actually I'm from Northern VA, and favor DC statehood of some description, it seems only fair -- it was really heinous before they were even given the right to vote in presidential elections, now they are just under-represented in them. I'm mostly disgusted with the mints decision on multiple levels -- again with the causing trouble.

[Joe Loy]

"...Only way to find out is to sue McCain..."

dcl, I verymuch doubt (a) that the question is presently Ripe for litigation, since McCain isn't even Nominated yet (and Can't be until September), let alone Elected (an event which Cannot occur until December); and also (b) that The Huckamiracleworker :> presently (if Ever) would have Standing to be the Plaintiff: how is he, in Particular, harmed, and by what action (or inaction) of McCain's to date?

Cue: Mister Justice Loy... :)

[dcl]

Hmm, that is an intriguing question, just what is the enforcement mechanism for this constitutional provision? Just the the theory that the voters will vote in accordance with it? That the Electors shall resolve it? That Congress can reject the election of the President on the floor if it goes against the provision? Can the court act to remove a president it deems does not meet the criteria? In which case does the Supreme Court have original jurisdiction on the matter? And who could bring the harm? The challenger candidate? There is nothing in the Constitution to suggest that they would have standing on the matter. And the previous president is no longer president and thus not the Chief law enforcement officer anymore. If the house and Senate are empowered to stop it, what's the vote, and it certainly makes the congressional elections mean an awful lot this november if someone decides they want to challenge McCain on this point. And if Congress does enforce it, can the candidate then sue congress in the supreme court to force himself to be seated. Or is it simply up to the Chief Justice to not swear him in? But under the constitution the president take power automatically at noon regardless of weather or not he is sworn in.

[B. Minich]

Cool, Dane. Sorry to imply you didn't know otherwise. Didn't know you were also a DC Metro Area guy.

I'm more in favor of retrocession myself (Virginia did their part years ago!), mostly because as the political system now stands, it doesn't seem like DC deserves two Senators by themselves . . . although I'd be pretty satisfied if they got a vote or two in the House, anyway. In any event, the status quo isn't acceptable, and I'd accept DC statehood over the current situation if it were up to me with that particular choice.

[Alasdair]

What if a US Citizen was delivered by C-Section, rather than by natural birth ?

Does that rule him/her out for the Presidency ?

Did Penn (or Rove) discover that Senator Obama was untimely ripp'd, and hence not natural-born ?

[Joe Loy]

Now that is altogether Brilliant, o thou mighty Thane of Fife! Lay on! {But What, all my pretty chickens and their dam at one fell swoop? :}

"I'm more in favor of retrocession myself (Virginia did their part years ago!)..."

Yeah they did, B. Minich; but, they Lost. / Hm? / Oh, you said RETROcession, I SEE now, I Heard it wrong, nevermind, just Look Away, OK? :> So, you propose to simply dump the whole political problem rely on Maryland, asking Them to finally step up to the Plate after Delaying the Game for so long. Well, I can certainly support That :}. The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing, and everyone will know we should do the right thing ;>.

dcl, Kudos on your excellent series of Questions in your Comment above. / As a Proceduralist acolyte, you are learning Well, young padawan ;}.

However :> ~

"...And the previous president is no longer president and thus not the Chief law enforcement officer anymore...under the constitution the president take power automatically at noon regardless of whether or not he is sworn in."

Well, not so Much. (pertinent Excerpts only; emphases added) ~

ARTICLE XX.

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January...of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

...Section 3... If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified....

Not that it Solves the problem; but FWIW, there it Is.