Posted on 10/18/2011 4:40:00 PM PDT by mandaladon
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) -- South Carolina lacks the authority to conduct a 2012 presidential primary, according to a lawsuit filed by four counties at the state Supreme Court.
The counties, in a case filed Monday, argue a 2008 primary law doesn't apply to running a 2012 primary. They argue the state Election Commission lacks the authority to conduct the primary and enter a contract with the state Republican Party to pay for it. And they say the commission can't require counties to cover expenses for the GOP primary.
The counties said they "are on the precipice of having to expend precious public funds to conduct what is wholly a private function on behalf of a private political party."
The lawsuit names the state Election Commission and the state Republican and Democratic parties.
State GOP Executive Director Matt Moore said the primary is part of the state's law. "It's clearly written in this year's budget law that the state should be involved with the 2012 primary so any claim otherwise is wrong," Moore said. He said the primary is an important public function, not a private operation.
The litigation was filed hours after a meeting between county voting officials and the state Election Commission and caps weeks of arguments about counties getting stuck with the tab for putting on the primary.
The Supreme Court has not decided to hear the case. If it did, and ruled in the counties' favor, legislators could be forced to come into session to pass a special primary law as deadlines loom for the Jan. 21 contest. The state has to have names to put on the ballot by Nov. 1 and it has to have overseas absentee ballots in the mail by Dec. 7.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
I believe they do. However, the Governor’s executive authority in SC is otherwise extremely weak. SC is a state where the General Assembly holds all the power and they will fight tooth and nail at any executive-branch attempt to limit or deny it. A heavily-Republican General Assembly voting to override Haley’s veto and sticking taxpayers with the primary bill is typical.
}:-)4
Willard does not want to lose this primary to Cain. That is what is going on here. No one else has a motive.
BUT...But...but...I thought Cain is just a stalking horse for Mitt?
You wouldn’t even necessarily need the “or” or “not”. Generally when using the term “whether” the “or not” is implied and redundant. You also don’t necessarily need the word “yet” as it is entirely possible the case may never reach SCOTUS. I think if you just put it as “The Supreme Court has not decided [whether] to hear the case” would be sufficiently clear. But I also don’t see anything wrong with how it is written... maybe it’s because I’ve read many court opinions in my time but that statement seems pretty clear to me that the Court just has not heard the case yet...
That sentence may just have been poor wording on the author's part. It has a much different meaning than "The Supreme Court has decided not to hear the case."
Great answer/response. I felt the same way after wading through this BS:
“Who’s behind it? Rats or Rinos?”
’ Both. There’s no difference.’
I love Rush. I’m a 2 year at a time member of 24/7, and subscriber to the Letter. With all due respect to Rush, and with the very existence of our country in the balance, if Mittens gets the nomination, and it appears to be because of establishment, and Democrat tampering, then the delegates should walk into that convention and tell the National GOP to go pound sand.
After 2008, we should have fixed the whole open primary issue by now, but it’s clear now why they didn’t.
State primaries for both parties should be held on the same day, and they should be closed to anyone not registered to the party. That way if Dems want to interfere with our primary they have to sacrifice voting in theirs. And vice versa. Again all due respect to Rush, but I was never very comfortable with the “Operation Chaos” thing, and I know he was poking back at Dems who had already been doing it to us, but I always thought it was a case of too much “stooping to their level”.
I would have to agree with the counties. If the sole purpose of the election is to pick the GOP presidential candidate and not to choose all candidates for all state and federal offices, then I would be opposed to using tax dollars to fund the election.
Unless the primary covers all potential candidates for the 2012 congressional, legislative, and senatorial races, then South Carolina has no business using tax dollars to finance this primary.
This is such a great reminder!
Political parties do not appear in the US Constitution.
Political parties are not required by the US Constitution.
There is no such thing as a "2 party system" in the US Constitution.
Political parties are, as this article says, PRIVATE entities.
Great catch and analysis, P-M.
If the sole purpose of this South Carolina Primary was to choose the Democrat candidate for President I suspect that a lot of FReepers who are complaining about this lawsuit would be joining in the lawsuit to prevent the State of South Carolina from using Taxpayer funds to assist the Democrat party to choose their candidate.
FWIW, I despise the whole idea of having government paid primary elections. If the Republicans or the Democrats want to field a candidate in a race, then they should find a way of doing it without using my tax dollars.
I find it quite offensive that my tax dollars are being used to fund political parties to which I violently disagree. Each political party should have to shoulder the cost of choosing the candidates that they run in an election. I don't know when this whole idea of taxpayer funded primaries came in, but I don't think it is constitutional.
You don’t need to send me a link to those details to know that the whole GOP animal is corrupt.
Maybe Lindsey Graham is pulling the strings on this for Romney.
Indeed. Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!
Agreed, we speak a language with thousands of variations and hundreds of ways to say things clearly, without ambiguity. Unfortunately the writer chose none of them. Good thing you understood the first time around, I commend you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.