Zera's Blog

A Citizen's View from Main Street

Russell Pearce, Recalled Arizona Senate President, Could Get State Reimbursement For Campaign


Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, standing i...At least one Arizona state senator thinks that an obscure provision in the state constitution could entitle recalled state Senate President (R) to money from the state.

State Sen. Jack Harper (R-Surprise) said that his reading of Article 8, Part 1, Section 6 of the state constitution would allow Pearce to ask the state to reimburse the cost of his unsuccessful campaign to fight being recalled from office this week.

According to records on the Arizona secretary of state’s office website, Pearce raised $230,282 for the recall campaign and spent $159,587. Pearce, the architect of Arizona’s controversial immigration law, lost the recall election in his Maricopa County district to fellow Republican Jerry Lewis.

This raises an interestin­g question of constituti­onal law.

Article VIII

Section 6. The general election laws shall apply to recall elections in so far as applicable­. Laws necessary to facilitate the operation of the provisions of this article shall be enacted, including provision for payment by the public treasury of the reasonable special election campaign expenses of such officer.

But looking further (figurativ­ely) – Article VIII again: Continue reading

Advertisements

November 11, 2011 Posted by | Campaign Finance, Constitution | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

INTERPOL: Quran Burning Would Increase Global Terror Threat (1)


Ooo, right out of the fear-monger’s handbook.

Interpol does not do field work. It is an information clearinghouse and facilitator. Law enforcement is done by local agencies under local laws. Period.

Interpol is accountable to US law. Executive Order 13524 adds some standard exemptions from those laws. The new protections can be revoked, as they were granted, with the stroke of a pen.

When Reagan first recognized Interpol, they had no personnel stationed on United States soil. Information we shared with them was held in a foreign country, outside our jurisdiction. That changed when they opened an office at the United Nations. The new change effectively restores the same protections that INTERPOL had to begin with, nothing more. There has been no expansion of Interpol authority or surrender of US sovereignty.

“The new order does not enable or authorize INTERPOL or its officials to conduct searches or seizures, make arrests or take any other law enforcement actions in the United States.”

INTERPOL is limited to working through the Department of Justice.

This change simply protects the Interpol personnel, and the information we choose to share with them, and the information they have acquired from other countries and keep on United States soil, from further prying. If you want to know what was shared, then FOIA the DoJ. Odds are they will not share information in an ongoing investigation either. It’s just that now you can’t go around them by attacking Interpol clerks.

As INTERPOL has no investigative or enforcement authority in the United States, the Fourth Amendment is not applicable.

More on Terrorism
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

September 10, 2010 Posted by | Administration, Crime, Foreign Relations | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: