The Republican Club of Sun City

N E W S L E T T E R

January 2016                Everett Schmidt, Editor   Sun City Texas

rcsctx.com

(Subjects in this newsletter: Overview of 2016 Conventions & Elections, Presidential Election Process, Electoral College, 25th   Amendment)

 

A “CANDIDATES’ FORUM” BEGINS NEW YEAR OF PROGRAMS

A “Candidates’ Forum” consisting of one or both of the candidates for U. S. Representative, Dist. 31,  three and possibly all four of the remaining candidates for Sheriff, both of the candidates for the Texas Supreme Court, Place 3, and all four candidates for County Court-at-Law, No. 2 will be held during the club meeting scheduled for Thursday, January 14 in the ballroom of the Social Center in Sun City. The following list of candidates are named in the order they will appear on the ballot:

U. S. Congressman, Dist. 31: John Carter (pending), Mike Sweeney

Sheriff: Randy Elliston (pending), William (Bill) Kelberlau, Mike Cowie, Robert Chody

Justice, Texas Supreme Court, Pl. 3: Michael Massengale, Debra Lehrmann

Judge, Co. Ct. at Law No. 2: Warren Oliver Waterman, Lesli Fitzpatrick, Brandy Hallford, Laura Barker

The participants will be divided into two panels with the first panel involving the candidates for U. S Congressman and Sheriff, and the second panel involving the candidates for the Supreme Court and the Court-at-Law positions. At the conclusion of each panel, there will be a short question and answer period originating from the floor. Moderator for the event is Judge Bill Gravell, Justice of the Peace for Precinct 3.

Ted Kennedy, VP for programs, reports that another “Candidates’ Forum” will be held during the club meeting scheduled for February 4 in the Cowan Creek Amenity Center.

BEGINNING TIMES:   Social Hour  –  6:00 PM;   Dinner  –  6:30 PM;   Program  –  7:00 PM (approx.)

MENU:  Spinach salad with almonds, mandarin oranges served with cranberry vinaigrette, assorted dinner rolls, grilled chicken breast with white wine glaze, ultimate vegetarian Mac-N-­Cheese, green beans almandine, jeweled rice pilaf, iced tea and raspberry lemonade.

   COST: Cost is $16 per person. Checks made out to “The Republican Club of Sun City” should be mailed to: The Republican Club of Sun City, 1530 Sun City Blvd., Suite 120, Box 227, Georgetown, TX 78633. The deadline for payment or reservations is Friday, January 8.

Bill Harron, treasurer, has set up a special collection box on his front porch at 125 Stetson Trail for individuals wishing to hand-deliver payments. For information, contact Bill at 512-864-0965 or BHarron@aol.com

VISITORS ARE WELCOME! (Non-members may attend a maximum of two meetings per year – as attendees for the dinner or as observers for the program – without having to pay membership dues.)

 

SCHEDULE OF CLUB MEETINGS FOR 2016 ANNOUNCED

Eleven club meetings have been scheduled for the year 2016. Of that number, eight are scheduled in the Social Center ballroom, the club’s usual meeting location; however, because of problems involving the scheduling of events in the ballroom, three of the meetings had to be scheduled in another location, the Cowan Creek Amenity Center, in the combined Georgetown and Florence rooms and possibly also the combined Jarrell and Walburg rooms if they are needed. Following is the schedule of meetings for 2016:

MONTH            DATE   DAY                 LOCATION

January            14        Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

February             4        Thursday          Cowan Creek Amenity Center*

March               10        Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

April                 20        Wednesday      Social Center Ballroom

May                  18        Wednesday      Social Center Ballroom

June                   2        Thursday          Cowan Creek Amenity Center

July                  14        Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

August             11         Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

September          8        Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

October              6        Thursday          Cowan Creek Amenity Center

November         17        Thursday          Social Center Ballroom

*The February meeting is scheduled to be a “Candidates’ Forum” involving several Republican candidates for office who will be divided into two groups for rotation of their presentations in the combined Georgetown/Florence and the combined Jarrell/Walburg rooms. Having their presentations made in relatively small areas, candidates could thereby better connect with their audiences and vice versa. Detailed information concerning the arrangements for this meeting will be provided later.

MEMBERSHIP DRIVE FOR 2016 CONTINUES; TO CONCLUDE IN JANUARY

          Both residents and non-residents of Sun City who “believe in the philosophy of the Republican Party” may join the club for the year 2016 upon payment of the $15 per person membership fee submitted at a club meeting, via mail sent to the address shown in the “COST” section above, or by placing payments in a special box located on the front porch of the club treasurer, Bill Harron, at 125 Stetson Trail.

Current Club 2015 Members. Current 2015 club members who have had no changes in contact information as shown on the 2015 roster may renew for 2016 by simply remitting the $15 membership fee – without having to submit another application form. See the special message from Cathy Cody, 2nd VP, on last page.

Prospective New Members. A current eligible non-member wishing to join the club for 2016 may submit an application (available at club meetings and the club website) along with payment of the $15 per person membership fee mailed to the address and locations shown above. See the special message from Cathy Cody, 2nd VP, on last page.

Deadlines. Renewing and new members are asked to submit membership dues by no later than January 31 in order that their names can be included in the roster printed in the Yearbook. While dues can still be accepted after that deadline, names may not be so listed. Individuals who have not paid dues by February 28 will not have newsletters and other items automatically transmitted to them until dues are paid.

 

OTHER CLUB NEWS

          Club Elects Officers. During its November 19 dinner meeting, the club elected the following slate of officers for the year 2016:

 President – Meredith Chiles   Treasurer – Bill Harron    Publicity Manager – Kathy Kennedy   1st VP (programs) – Ted Kennedy   Secretary – Pattie Brady                    Hospitality Director – Teri Adsit   2nd VP (membership) – Cathy Cody 

 

 President Makes Appointments. Club president Meredith Chiles made appointments as follows for the year 2016: Chaplin – Judge Bill Gravell; Sergeant at Arms – Kevin Stofle; Wine Steward – Gary Preston; Webmaster – Bill Harron; Newsletter Editor – Everett Schmidt; Parliamentarian – Everett Schmidt.   

 

      Statistics. Bill Harron, treasurer, reports that the number of attendees at the November 19 dinner was 139, plus 10 individuals attending as observers.

Website Demonstration. During the coming January 14 dinner meeting, Bill Harron, webmaster, will provide a brief demonstration of the various types of information which are now available on the club’s website, rcsctx.com, and how that information can be accessed and utilized.

Purchases Approved. The Executive Committee approved the purchase a supply of bumper stickers which will be available at club meetings and a supply of the booklet “Essential Liberty” which is made available to each member. The booklet contains the Declaration, the Constitution and important historical information.

 

 

REAGAN DINNER SCHEDULED AT SUN CITY

Governor Greg Abbott is Keynote Speaker

            The county party’s fund-raising event, the Reagan Dinner, is scheduled for Tuesday, February 9 in the ballroom of the Social Center in Sun City. Keynote speaker is Governor Greg Abbott. Master of Ceremonies is Supreme Court Justice Don Willett.

For information and forms regarding the sponsorship of tables (each seating 10 people) and benefits related thereto refer to the party web site, www.WilliamsonCountyGOP.org

Single tickets can be purchased for $85 each. Payment should be sent to WCRP, P. O. Box 393, Round Rock, TX 78680.

Beginning times (tentative): Registration, Silent Auction, General Reception – 5:00 PM; Host Reception – 6:00 PM; Dinner – 7:00 PM.

For other information, see the county party web site at www.WilliamsonCountyGOP.org or contact Bill Fairbrother at bill.fairbrother@gopusa.com or Nita Davidson at reagandinner@williamsoncountygop or 512-635-6482.

 

Especially For Those Who Want to Get Involved in the Effort to Save America:

AN OVERVIEW OF THE 2016 G.O.P. CONVENTIONS AND ELECTIONS

Following is a schedule of important events from the primary election through the general election scheduled for November 8:

 

        Feb. 16 (Tues.) – Feb. 26 (Fri.)             Early Voting in Primary Election

        March 1 (Tues.)                      Primary Election

         March 1 (Tues.)                       Precinct Convention*

         March 19 (Sat.)                         County Convention**
        May 12 (Thurs.) – May 14 (Sat.)   State GOP Convention (Dallas)***

         May 16 (Mon.) – May 20 (Fri.)       Early Voting in Primary Runoff Election

         July 18 (Tues.) – July 21 (Thurs.)  National GOP Convention (Cleveland)+

          Oct. 24 (Mon.) – Nov. 4 (Fri)            Early Voting in General Election

          Nov. 8 (Tues.)                              General Election

*The Precinct Conventions will begin at 7:00 PM or after the voting held that day has concluded. The purposes of a precinct convention are (1) to elect delegates and alternates to the County Convention, and (2) to receive and vote on proposed resolutions (i.e., planks to the state party platform) to be submitted to the County Convention. Each precinct is entitled to send to the County Convention one delegate for every 25 votes cast during the most recent election for Governor. (The most recent Texas GOP platform  – from 2014 – a 40-page document, may be accessed at www.TexasGOP.org)

Sun City is comprised of 3 precincts: 381 (Barbara Maybray, ch.), 394 (Cathy Cody, ch.) and 396 (Terry Putnam, ch.)

**The main purposes of the County Convention are (1) to select delegates and alternates to the State Convention, and (2) to adopt resolutions (party platform planks) to be forwarded to the State Convention.

***The main purposes of the State Convention are (1) to adopt a party platform, (2) to elect the State Chairman and State Vice Chairman, (3) to select delegates and alternates to the National Convention, (4) to select a National Committeeman and a National Committeewoman to serve on the Republican National Committee (RNC), and (5) to select “electors” (the persons who will actually elect the president as described below in the report on the Electoral College.)

+The main purposes of the National Convention are (1) to nominate an official GOP candidate for the upcoming U. S. presidential election, and (2) to adopt a national party platform and the rules for the election cycle.

 

THE 2016 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION PROCESS

Foreword. The coming GOP presidential primary election will be carried out under a new set of rules promulgated by the Republican National Committee (RNC) designed to correct some of the problems noted about past presidential primary elections and the political campaigning leading up to those elections.

Some of the rules are exceedingly complicated, inviting not only confusion among the electorate, but also inviting attempts to manipulate the new set of rules.

Given that situation, this report – which is detailed – is to provide the reader with some basic information  which he or she may find helpful in dealing with that confusion and the attempts to manipulate.

An Overview of the New Rules Adopted by the RNC. Tim Alberta, Chief Political Correspondent for National Review, wrote in that publication an extended article about the work of Reince Priebus, who, as Chairman of the RNC, was instrumental in developing those rules and in carrying them out. Following are  reports by Alberta analyzing some of the more important rules now in effect:

            THE NOMINATING PROCESS CALENDAR

            These changes  – compressing the election calendar, passing rules to prevent unauthorized states from scheduling their primaries too early in the year, moving the convention up to mid July from late August, cutting the number of debates in half and making sure conservative media would participate in them – had all been spearheaded by Priebus  . . .

 

THE PRIMARY ELECTIONS

Convinced that the primary calendar in 2012 had gotten too drawn out, the chairman would compress the primary-election schedule to limit the infighting and select a nominee as quickly as possible. That meant starting the contests in February instead of January, moving the convention up to mid July from late August, and changing he delegate-allocation rules to let winner-take-all elections begin earlier in 2016 than they had in 2012.

 

   THE NUMBER OF DEBATES

The mission was threefold: reducing the number of debates, spreading them around the country to reach battleground states, and introducing a conservative-media element to counterbalance what many party officials saw as biased moderating in 2012…The RNC settled on nine debates from August to February, reserving the possibility of up to three additional debates in march, depending on the state of the race.

 

The Differences from 2012. Time writer Zeke Miller explains the differences between the 2016 election and the 2012 election as follows:

First off, the sheer number of candidates – 15 at one point. Second, the RNC moved to condense the calendar, keeping the Iowa caucuses from encroaching on New Years and moving the convention into July, and the last primaries to early June. The thinking was this would prevent the drawn-out primary fight that weakened Mitt Romney last cycle. Additionally, more states moved their primaries and caucuses into early March in an effort to play a more significant role in the nominating process, and thereby receive more attention from candidates. But all states voting before March 15 must award their delegates proportionally (though each state interprets that to their own liking) . . .The 2016 primary calendar is technically shorter, but more importantly, it will be way more intense than the 2012 race.

The Different Kinds of Delegates. Priebus points out that there are three types of delegates:

AT-LARGE DELEGATES are statewide delegates who are residents of that state and are selected at large. Each state receives 10 at-large delegates plus additional at large delegates based on the state’s past Republican successes.
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT DELEGATES must be residents of and selected by the congressional district they represent. Each state gets three congressional district delegates per district.
RNC MEMBERS are automatically national convention delegates and include the state’s national committeeman, national committeewoman, and state chair.

How Are Delegates Allocated? Priebus explains that each state assigns its delegates according to its own rules in consultation with the RNC and according to its location in the primary calendar. There are three main allocation methods.
Proportional methods divide the state’s delegates based on results of their primary vote. Most states have a threshold percentage that a candidate must reach to be eligible for delegates. Proportional states may also award their delegates on a winner-take-all basis for candidates who receive more that 50% of the vote. (All states with votes between March 1 and March 14 must have proportional allocation.)
Winner-Take-All method awards all of the state’s delegates to the candidate that wins the highest percentage of the state’s votes. (States are permitted to award their delegates based on  winner-take-all after March 14.)
Hybrid states award delegates based on a combination of methods.

The Schedule of State Primary Elections and Caucuses. The schedule of primaries and caucuses

presented below is divided into three groups, depending primarily on how delegates are selected:

GROUP 1: FEBRUARY PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES

Feb. 1: Iowa caucuses  (30 delegates proportionally awarded)

Feb. 9: New Hampshire primary (23 delegates proportionally awarded)

Feb. 20: South Carolina primary (50 delegates awarded on a winner-take-all basis)

Feb. 23: Nevada caucuses (30 delegates proportionally awarded)

                              GROUP 2: THE PERIOD MARCH 1 (SUPER TUESDAY) TO MARCH 15

 Every state that has a primary or caucus before March 15 splits their delegates proportionally among the top finishers. That means, for instance, Iowa’s 30 delegates won’t all go to the winner of the Iowa caucuses; they’ll instead be spit among the top earner in the state. Same goes for New Hampshire’s 23, South Carolina’s 50, Nevada’s 30, Alabama’s 50, Alaska’s 28, Arkansas’ 40, Georgia’s 76, Massachusetts’ 42, Minnesota’s 38, Oklahoma’s 43, Tennessee’s 58, Texas’s 155, Vermont’s 16,Virginia’s 49, Wyoming’s 29, Kansas’s 40. Kentucky’s 45, Louisiana’s 47, Maine’s 23, Puerto Rico’s 23, Hawaii’s 19, Idaho’s 32, Michigan’s 59, Mississippi’s 40, Guam’s 9, and the 19 delegates in Washington, D.C.

 That means 1,113 delegates are awarded on a proportional basis before any winner-take-all state even comes up. That’s almost half of the 2,472 total delegates awarded and nearly enough to equal what’s necessary to win the GOP nomination, 1,237 delegates.

                              GROUP 3: THE PERIOD AFTER MARCH 15.

 It isn’t until March 15, when Florida and several other states hold GOP contests, that states can begin awarding their delegates on a winner-take-all basis – giving all delegates to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state’s primary or caucus. That means, in total, only 400 delegates come from  states that are truly winner-take-all. Several other states, like California with 173 delegates or Pennsylvania with 71 delegates or Illinois with 69 are what the RNC calls “hybrid” states . . .

               The Votes at the National Convention. Newsmax, in its December 2015 issue, reports 2,472 delegates are authorized to participate in the convention with 1,237 needed to win the nomination. If no candidate secures enough delegates by the time of the convention, the result would be a “brokered convention.” Karl Rove reports that during the past 16 Republican National Conventions, the party’s presidential nominee has been selected on the first ballot. But in regard to the 2016 convention, Rove states, “With only around 40% of the delegates chosen in winner-take-all contests, they may be splintered enough that no candidate commands an outright majority.” This convention could be exciting!

    The Texas Primary Election. Each state has some latitude in establishing its own rules as does Texas:

The state has 155 delegates, but three – the state GOP chairman, the national committeeman and the national committeewoman – are Super Delegates who can pledge their support to whomever they wish. Of the 152 remaining delegates, one-forth – or 38 – will be decided by a vote of the attendees at the state’s GOP convention in May. The remaining three-fourths – or 114 – will be up for grabs on March 1. But all of those delegates may only go to one  candidate if they receive more than 50 percent of the vote in each of the state’s 36 congressional districts. Otherwise, they are awarded proportionally.

Republican consultant Matt Mackowiak contends, “on March 1, we will likely see the largest primary turnout in the history of the state. The 2016 primary in Texas will be unlike anything we have ever seen.”

 

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE:

THE FOUNDER’S SHIELD AGAINST THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY

That Shield is Now Under Assault

            The Vision of the Founders. Political pundits (and liberals) may argue that it would be undemocratic to deny the presidency to the person who received the most votes – the “popular vote” – nationwide. But former Congressman Ron Paul, who is a respected scholar on the original intent of various Constitutional tenets, offers the following rebuttal to those pundits:

  Their argument is hostile to the Constitution, however, which expressly established the United States as a constitutionally limited republic and not a direct democracy. The Founding Fathers sought to protect certain fundamental

 freedoms, such as freedom of speech, against the changing whims of popular opinion. Similarly, they created the electoral college to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections. The president was to be elected by the 50 states rather than the American people directly, to ensure that less populated states had a voice in national elections. This is why they blended electoral college votes between U. S. House seats, which are based on population, and U. S. Senate seats, which are accorded equally to each state. The goal was to balance the inherent tension between majority will and majority tyranny. Those who wish to abolish the electoral because it’s not purely democratic should also argue that less populated states . . .don’t deserve two senators.

 

     The Electoral College Generally Described. Following is a general description of the Electoral College as found on the www.archives website:

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and the election of the President by a popular  vote of qualified citizens.

The electoral College process consists of (1) the selection of the electors, (2) the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and (3) the counting of the electoral votes by Congress. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Your state’s entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators.

Under the 23rd Amendment, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state . . .

Electoral Votes by State and the D. C. The following chart shows the number of electors each state, plus the District of Columbia, has. It is presented on grounds that it may contribute to a general understanding of this report and provide some basis of better understanding polling data and the voting strength which could be accorded to each state. For example, the first election is to be held in Iowa, a state which has only 6 electoral votes, but will receive much news coverage. (Note that Texas has 38 votes)

Alabama – 9   Georgia – 16     Maryland – 10      New Jersey – 14     South Carolina – 9    Alaska – 3    Hawaii – 4    Mass. – 11    New Mexico – 5      South Dakota – 3                    Arizona – 11   Idaho – 4   Michigan – 16  New York – 29      Tennessee – 11                   Arkansas – 6     Illinois – 20   Minnesota – 10    No. Carolina – 15    Texas – 38            California – 55    Indiana – 11   Mississippi – 6     No. Dakota – 3      Utah – 6                  Colorado – 9    Iowa -6    Missouri – 10     Ohio – 18  Vermont – 3                               Connecticut – 7    Kansas – 6   Montana – 3   Oklahoma – 7    Virginia – 13                    Delaware – 3   Kentucky – 8    Nebraska – 5   Oregon – 7   Washington – 12                            D. C. – 3 Louisiana – 8   Nevada – 6   Penn. – 20   W. Virginia – 5 Florida – 29                       Maine – 4 New Hamp. – 4  Rhode Island – 4    Wisconsin – 10  Wyoming – 3

    The Electoral College Plan. The Constitution states that electors from each state are to choose the President and the Vice President, and states further that it is up the state legislatures to determine how those electors are selected. It is only by happenstance that states use a popular vote to choose their electors.

In Texas, Republican presidential electors are elected during the state Republican Convention when convention  delegates, meeting by congressional districts, elect the elector to represent  a given congressional district. Electors sign pledges promising to vote for the Republican presidential candidate on the ballot in the event a Republican won the state’s popular vote.

It should be noted that the present plan resulted in presidential candidate Al Gore, in 2000, winning the nation’s popular vote by half a percentage point, but losing his race in the Electoral College. That situation occurred three times previously in the nation’s history.

The meeting of the electors takes place on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December after the presidential election. The electors meet in their respective states where they cast their votes.

Each state’s electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress on the 6th of January in the year following the meeting of electors.

Some Problems With Apportionment Based on the Census. Of the 538 electors in the Electoral College, 103 are based on an allotment of 2 electors from each state, plus 3 electors from Washington, D. C. That number, 103, will not change either it total number or by state. While the total number of the remaining electors will remain fixed at 435, there can be a change in the allocation of electors from individuals states – depending on the apportionment of Representatives each state will have as is determined by the census conducted each ten years.

But there is a problem with the census as now conducted, a problem the founders could not have anticipated. It is a problem caused by a lack of any meaningful enforcement of our border security and immigration laws, and the resulting influx of illegal aliens who have been counted in the census.

The problem stems from Article I, Section 2 which speaks in terms of apportionment being based on the “whole number of persons” in each state. That phrase has enabled non-citizens to be counted in the census, and thereby to provide a major benefit to Democrats as is explained by Goldman and Rozell writing in Politico:

 

Using citizen-only population statistics, American University scholar Leonard Steinhorn projects California would lose five House seats and therefore five electoral votes. New York and Washington would each lose one seat, and thus one electoral vote apiece. . . Republican stronghold Texas would lose two House seats and therefore two electoral votes. Florida loses one seat and thus one electoral vote.

But that leaves the electoral math only half done. The 10 House seats taken away from these states would then need to be reallocated to states with relatively small numbers of noncitizens. The following ten states, the bulk of which leans Republican, would likely gain one House seat and thus one additional electoral vote: Iowa, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.

The Supreme Court Hears Case Having Potential for Change. On December 10, the U. S. Supreme Court heard a case, Evenwel v. Abbott, which, while it did not relate directly to the census problem, may have implications “down the line”  on the number of electors assigned to the various states. The suit questions the propriety of counting children and noncitizens in the process of drawing political districts. Among the considerations the court will weigh are the violation of the one-person, one-vote principle and the question of whether those individuals counted should bear some relation to the state. Already, by current practice, tourists are not counted.

Another Potential Problem: The National Popular Vote Compact. There is currently an effort underway of several states banding together in a National Popular Vote Compact in which states, through their legislatures, agree to give all the electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, regardless of how residents of a particular state vote.

With the addition of New York to the compact, the effort is well underway with at least 10 states (plus the District of Columbia) – all of which backed Obama in 2012 – having signed the Compact, with other states considering a move in that direction.

 

THE TWENTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT

AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE IMPEACHMENT PROCESS

The Urgency of the Removal Question. As a means of dramatizing the relevance of Congress’ ability to remove a sitting president who is about to enter his final year in office, who has taken many unconstitutional steps to “transform” America, and who has done so with impunity, the reader is asked to reflect on several questions representative of conservative thought: (1) is another attack like the one at San Bernadino more or less likely to occur in 2016? (2) has Obama handled those conflicts and the negotiations dealing with Islam responsibly and with indications that he realistically understands Islam? (3) Does he have your confidence? (4) if the nation is attacked again will his support continue or will it virtually evaporate, even by Democrats?

Potential Events in 2016. Predictions that the nation will again be attacked are not uncommon. Sen. James Inhofe (R.-OK), upon learning that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff contested Obama’s claim that ISIS was “contained,” stated in regard to the possibility of another attack, “It’s going to happen and I don’t know when it’s going to happen.”

Rush Limbaugh, often quoted as host of the nation’s largest talk-show audience, said, “We’re fast approaching Obama’s last year in office. I want to warn you again, in all likelihood, there are going to be things this president does in the next 12 months that you can’t even think of or conceive of now. . . [I]t doesn’t matter what the courts say, it doesn’t matter if Obama policies have a stay on them or temporary halt. It’s his last chance to have personal stamps or fingerprints on the transformation of this country. He knows the Republicans have taken impeachment [off the table] – it’s late for that anyway. There’s not gonna be any effort to stop him.”

Dianne Feinstein (D.- CA), the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the following about Obama’s comment that ISIL (sometimes termed ISIS) had been “contained”: “ISIL is not contained. ISIL is expanding. They’ve just put out a video saying it is their intent to attack this country.”  

Purpose of This Report. The common perception is that a president can be removed from office only by a two-stage process spelled out in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution which states removal can come about “on Impeachment [by the House] for and Conviction [by the Senate] of Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Andrew McCarthy, author of several news articles and a book on the impeachment process, contends that the impeachment process is a “political” process, and absent a political will to remove him, Obama will remain president. And absent his removal, “the United States will be fundamentally reformed.”

Congress has indicated no willingness to challenge Obama, so prospects of an impeachment process appear bleak. (A review of McCarthy’s writings is available in the Jan. 2014 and July 2014 newsletters.)

But, thanks to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment ratified in 1967 – and specifically Section 4 – there has been added another procedure to remove a president from office. Although the procedure reportedly came close to being employed during the Reagan administration (explained later), it is untried.

While much of this report is in the concept of a possible or actual attack, the Twenty-Fifth Amendment may be useful in other contexts not involving an attack, such as concerns about mental disorder which could affect Obama’s judgment in carrying out his duties in a fair and constitutional manner.

In any event, it seems prudent that the citizenry begins to become aware of this Amendment inasmuch as during the coming death struggle for the soul of America, it could become of crucial importance.

   The Twenty-Fifth Amendment. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment was established on February 10, 1967, and included a procedure for replacing the president or vice president when either office is vacant. It was proposed in 1963 in the aftermath of the assassination of president John F. Kennedy in 1963. Certain sections of it have been used during the presidential terms of Richard Nixon (who appointed Gerald Ford to replace Spiro Agnew), Gerald Ford (who appointed Nelson Rockefeller as VP), and when president Reagan and president George W. Bush made temporary appointments during their surgeries

The above examples involve Sections 1, 2 and 3. Section 4, the provision which might be used to remove a president for other reasons, has not, as was pointed out above, been used. Section 4, as paraphrased by Legal Dictionary/Wikipedia,*  follows:

 Section 4 deals with the more difficult situation of a president who is unable or unwilling to acknowledge the inability to perform the duties of the office. The section authorizes the vice president and a majority of the presidential cabinet members [15] to determine whether the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. If they agree  that the president is incapacitated, the vice president immediately becomes acting president. The president may transmit to Congress a statement declaring that no inability exists and resume the duties of president. The vice president and the majority of the cabinet, however, may send a declaration to Congress within four days disputing the assertion of the president that he is able to discharge the duties of the office. If this happens, Congress must vote by a two-thirds               majority in both houses that the president is unable to serve. Otherwise, the president will reassume office. *An unedited version is available in the booklet, “Essential Liberty,” available to each club member.

The meaning of the language is not entirely clear. David Forte, writing in The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, states, “It was not an accident that the amendment did not define “inability.” It was intended principally to cover cases of both physical and mental inability . . .”

Forte’s explanation suggests a similar situation to that involving the use of the terms “high crimes and misdemeanors” which, contends McCarthy, do not pertain to the definition of the terms as they are generally understood. That phrase refers to political wrongs of public servants. It refers, continues McCarthy, to “breaches of the fiduciary duty, of the immense trust that’s reposed in the president.”

While, as was reported above, Section 4 has not yet been used, there are reports that it was recommended for consideration in regard to President Reagan. Columnist George Will says that newscaster Bill O’Reilly, in his book, Killing Reagan, reported that “Reagan was often addled to the point of incompetence causing senior advisers to contemplate using the 25th Amendment to remove him from office.” According to Wikipedia, Donald Regan, Reagan’s outgoing (and perhaps disgruntled) Chief of Staff, said Reagan was “inattentive,” “inept,” and “lazy”; however, Regan’s replacement, Howard Baker, reported no such problems, so the matter was dropped.

Questions About Obama’s Ability to Discharge Duties. Following are some observations about Obama’s mental health as a factor in his ability to discharge his presidential duties:

• There is evidence that Obama is a pathological liar, one indication of which was his dishonesty in regard to his contention, made numerous times, that citizens, when considering ObamaCare, could keep their doctors and their insurance. McCarthy contends that such behavior (even when made by politicians) constitutes serial fraud and therefore breaches a “fiduciary duty.” (See Jan. 2014 newsletter for professional opinion of Obama’s mental health)

• There is evidence that Obama is, to use terminology of psychiatrist/commentator Charles Krauthammer, an “extreme” narcissist.

• Obama’s actions and comments have frequently been categorized as “irrational” or “delusional.” Some examples: (1) his failure to connect Islam with terrorism as when the murders at Ft. Hood were classified as “workplace violence; (2) his release of 5 Gitmo detainees for one American who was given a hero’s welcome in the White House by Obama but who is  now facing trial for possible desertion; (3) his comments about the efficacy of the Iranian “deal” now appear specious in view of the disclosure that the deal was not signed and is not enforceable; (4) the paradox that Muslims are not Muslims when they engage in violence; and (5) his claim that the conference on climate change constituted a “rebuke” of terrorism. Other examples could also be listed.

 

Some Comparisons. Inasmuch as Article II (concerning impeachment) spelled out in the two-stage process outlined above appears to be more complicated than the process provided in the 25th Amendment, the second option may be the better of the two options.

In the event of another attack, Obama’s support may evaporate, and an angered nation may clamor for his removal. Even Democrats, may find it of political advantage to support such effort. Democrats supporting his removal may be able to rationalize that Obama was afflicted by some mental disorder which he couldn’t help, thus enabling Democrats to save face.

 

QUOTATION OF THE MONTH

    God, give us men! A time like this demands

    Strong minds, great hearts, true faith and ready hands;

    Men whom the lust of office does not kill;

    Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;

    Men who possess opinions and a will;

    Men who have honor; men who will not lie;

     Men who can stand before a demagogue

     And damn his treacherous flatteries without winking!

    Tall men, sun-crowned, who live above the fog

     In public duty and in private thinking;

    For while the rabble, with their thumb-worn creeds,

    Their large professions and their little deeds,

     Mingle in selfish strife, lo! Freedom weeps,

      Wrong rules the land and waiting Justice sleeps.

 

Josiah Gilbert Holland (1819-1881) from The Best Loved Poems of                                 American People

 

A SPECIAL MESSAGE FROM VICE PRESIDENT CODY

FOR CURRENT AND PROSPECTIVE MEMBERS

 

Happy New Year! We are planning on a 2016 Directory for early this year, so I need everyone to complete a Membership Form when you renew to make sure we have the correct information as well as the specific information you would like included in the Members Only section of that publication.

The deadline for submitting forms to be listed in the Directory is January 31. A membership form is attached to this newsletter for your convenience. (Thanks to those of you who have already submitted that form.)

This Directory will also include contact information of current elected officials.

I will be at the January 14 club meeting, along with treasurer Bill Harron, to accept your forms.

Thanks for being a member of this club. I hope you are as excited about the coming politically charged year as I am.

Cathy Cody

                                                            2nd Vice President (for membership)