Arnold breaking election laws

[lazarus]

http://kcal9.com/siteSearch/topstoriesla_story_062142655.html

Facing the biggest test yet of his young political career, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger voted Tuesday in favor of a $15 billion bond proposal he has called essential to restoring California's fiscal health.

Schwarzenegger voted shortly after 8:30 a.m. in a hillside recreation center near his Brentwood home, shaking hands with a few voters and telling one, "Be sure to vote yes on (Propositions) 57 and 58."

Isn't campaigning inside a polling place against the law?

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Yes he should be censured

[JohnOneillsMemory]

2. Isn't assaulting atleast 16 women against the law?

I just heard him on the radio making his $15 bn bond issue victory speech. He said "never again will California's budget be bankrupted."

So why the hell did he meet with Ken Lay of Enron in May '01? Could it be because Enron scammed $9billion out of the CA budget?

The Bush* cabal attacked California as if it was Haiti. First they destabilized the economy, then they installed a corporate-friendly strong man with Nazi ties.

I'm pissed because I moved to this state to escape Lieberman's corporate Connecticut. Now, the Terminator pinball machine at my local laundromat has my frikkin' governor in it saying "Nice shot!" and "Game Ovuh!"

grrrr.

[Cleita]

3. I think it's within a hundred feet of a polling place.

Who is going to stop him though? If he became governor in spite of being an alleged sexual predator and assaulter with questionable business dealings, how are you going to make this an issue?

[TahitiNut]

4. California Elections Code - Section 18370

18370. No person, on election day, or at any time that a voter may
be casting a ballot, shall, within 100 feet of a polling place or an
elections official's office:
(a) Circulate an initiative, referendum, recall, or nomination
petition or any other petition.
(b) Solicit a vote or speak to a voter on the subject of marking
his or her ballot.
(c) Place a sign relating to voters' qualifications or speak to a
voter on the subject of his or her qualifications except as provided
in Section 14240.
(d) Do any electioneering.
As used in this section, "100 feet of a polling place or an
elections official's office" means a distance 100 feet from the room
or rooms in which voters are signing the roster and casting ballots.

Any person who violates any of the provisions of this section is
guilty of a misdemeanor.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/elec/18370-18371.html

By law, there are signs posted outside all California polling places demarking the 100' perimeter.

[TahitiNut]

5. California Elections Code - Section 18001 - Penal Provisions

18001. Upon a conviction for any crime punishable by imprisonment
in any jail or prison, in relation to which no fine is herein
prescribed, the court may impose a fine on the offender not exceeding
one thousand dollars ($1,000) in cases of misdemeanors or ten
thousand dollars ($10,000) in cases of felonies, in addition to the
imprisonment prescribed.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/elec/18000-18002.html

(Misdemeanors are generally punishable by up to one day less than a year in jail. That would be in a sentencing guideline; it's procedural, not code.)

[lazarus]

7. So

Do you know a good prosecutor in California? :evilgrin:

[TahitiNut]

9. If I still lived there, I'd write/call the Secretary of State.

He's the most senior elections official in the state. Seems to me that the report (probably on TV with tape) is a slam-dunk.

After all, who spouts all the "nation of laws" shit? Doesn't Ahnald owe his office to the arcane recall provisions of those same elections laws?? (Live by the sword; die by the sword.)

I personally think it's not just a 'nit' ... in the nearly 4 decades I've voted (in MI, NY, CA, WA, and APO) I've never been to a polling place where they didn't take the electioneering prohibitions very seriously. I take them seriously as well -- especially for the Chief Law Enforcement official in the state!

[lazarus]

11. Y'know

I think I'll do that.

[theorist]

6. Remember!!!

If it isn't on Drudge, it ain't real news. At least that's what ABC, NBC, and FAUX seem to think.

[Mick Knox]

8. tsk tsk... naughty naught.. what an idiot.

And he wants to be prez? AND change the const.. to do it?

[420]

10. You get what you deserve

And you voted for it, Cali! Take your medicine and learn from it. Tough love is, perhaps, what it will take to make you "see the light." Uhhh... sorry. Harsh?

[lazarus]

12. LOL

No, I didn't vote for it. A very small majority of California voters voted for Arnold.

By the same token, maybe everyone should just STFU and take their medicine from Bush?

I'm sick and tired of being told I deserve this bastard for governor.

[420]

14. STFU!

Yeah, I sentence you to a harsh sentence cuz I live in Texas. Now everyone who has been ridiculed for being from TX stand up

[lazarus]

17. Heh

Before I moved to California, I lived in Alabama.

You got nothing. :D

[ma4t]

13. no wrongdoing at all in that

Sorry to break the news but there is nothing wrong with Gov. Schwarzenegger's actions. He thought about it and decided that his 1st Amendment right to free speech trumped the California law. Therefore, his was a courageous act - standing up on principal for the rights of all.

OK, now if anyone really believes the above you are too gullible; however, if you think it a load of bunk then tell me the difference in that justification and the justification for the mayor and clerks in San Francisco who are using an analogous argument for defying the law. This is what you get when you accept than any government official can ignore the law if he wants to.

[lazarus]

18. easy

One is ignoring a law for his own benefit, a law that has been upheld for years and has a very good purpose.

The other is performing an act of civil disobedience to demonstrate the unfairness of a discriminatory law.

See the difference?

[ma4t]

20. not so easy

"The other is performing an act of civil disobedience to demonstrate the unfairness of a discriminatory law."

The other is performing an act of civil disobedience to demonstrate the overriding importance of free speech.


Not that I necessarily believe that, but you see how easy it is to justify what we already want to do by dressing our actions up as a principled stand. Wouldn't it be better to have our public officials actually respect the rule of law.

[lazarus]

21. No, I don't see

What I see is that you tried to make a point, it was shot down, and you're now going on as if your point still stands.

[TahitiNut]

22. Sheer sophistry.

Newsome is/was complying with city, county, and (state) Constitutional laws in performing his duties. The sole 'law' he (allegedly, not provably) broke has not been tested in the courts. Indeed, in three separate preliminary court proceedings, TRO's have been denied and Newsome's behavior has not yet been deemed "illegal" nor has he been ordered (in any way) to desist in that behavior. There are many who believe that "law" is not law (i.e. null and void) since it's contrary to the State and Federal Constitution. Indeed, that it's contrary to the Federal Constitution is all but acknowledged since no Amendment would be needed if it were already constitutional.

Schwarzenegger is blatantly disregarding the very law to which he owes his own position -- a law extensively tested for its constitutionality. There is absolutely no compelling human or public interest served by Schwarzenegger's behavior. It's gratuitous and arrogant.

[leesa]

15. He's a Republican, laws don't apply to them.

[radwriter0555]

16. thta's right. they can overturn laws and make up new ones when session is

out, just as they please.

Laws mean nothing to republicans.

[TahitiNut]

19. Did Schwartzenfuhrer vote in the Democratic primary?

It looks like it.