Posts
I am up late tonight and working on getting my new XP laptop up and running so I can actually work uninterupted by the mouse going haywire, flickering screens,, Vista Operating System deciding what I want to do instead of vice versa.
What peaked my curiousity is the latest email I got about Obama's birth certificate and he does need to show one and prove he was actually born in Hawaii. But that is not what I would like post I am going to post an issue that has been obliquely referred to that I wondered about during the primary when I saw Hillary in Puerto Rico--and I still am not sure I understand it what happened. I think based on the law journal that Americans living in Puerto Rico voted, American Citizens in Puerto Rico--not Puerto Ricans who are not citizens of the US because it is not a state, I will look into this further, but if anyone can answer that,, for sure, email me because after tonight, I will be geeking it up for at least two days
see below, this is an Excerpt full article is the link in title
The Constitution Is Clear: Only States Vote in Congress
John C. Fortier, May 19, 2007 [View as PDF]
José R. Coleman Tió argues that Congress, under its power to govern territories, may grant Puerto Rico congressional representation without making it a state. This argument and a parallel argument about representation for the District of Columbia are flawed because the Constitution, not Congress, determines which entities get congressional representation, and the Constitution is clear that only states are represented.
For years, advocates of congressional representation for the District of Columbia generally followed three avenues to reach their goal: (1) admit the District as a state; (2) amend the Constitution; or (3) retrocede the District to Maryland, which once gave the land that makes up the District. But recently, Congress has considered a new and constitutionally dubious alternative. Under this plan, Congress would pass a simple piece of legislation granting representation to the District. The legislation relies on Congress’s broad constitutional power to rule over the District and follows the precedent of treating the District as a state in other legislation.
Coleman wishes to extend this argument to Puerto Rico with the small difference that Congress would rely on its power to govern territories to pass legislation granting congressional representation for Puerto Rico.
The Constitution Is Clear: Only States Vote in Congress
John C. Fortier, May 19, 2007 [View as PDF]
José R. Coleman Tió argues that Congress, under its power to govern territories, may grant Puerto Rico congressional representation without making it a state. This argument and a parallel argument about representation for the District of Columbia are flawed because the Constitution, not Congress, determines which entities get congressional representation, and the Constitution is clear that only states are represented.
For years, advocates of congressional representation for the District of Columbia generally followed three avenues to reach their goal: (1) admit the District as a state; (2) amend the Constitution; or (3) retrocede the District to Maryland, which once gave the land that makes up the District. But recently, Congress has considered a new and constitutionally dubious alternative. Under this plan, Congress would pass a simple piece of legislation granting representation to the District. The legislation relies on Congress’s broad constitutional power to rule over the District and follows the precedent of treating the District as a state in other legislation.
Coleman wishes to extend this argument to Puerto Rico with the small difference that Congress would rely on its power to govern territories to pass legislation granting congressional representation for Puerto Rico.
(photo was taken at Buckroe Beach this april)
