That’s part of the ploy. Give people a million menial jobs to elect so they feel exhausted by the process instead of demanding to have control over the real power.
See also the California senators, which have at this point been unilaterally appointed by Gavin rather than elected by the people. If that wasn’t bad enough, he appointed this latest one based on a personal promise made to put a Black woman in the seat, in exchange for some union to aid in his personal election campaign.
If anyone cared about civics, separation of power, or indeed democracy itself, there’d be rioting in the streets.
You’re saying part of the problem is people overwhelmed by menial job elections yet say people should elect police captains. Should they then also elect deputy police chiefs, police chiefs? Also, anyone that knows their civics would know that what Newsome did is covered in the US Constitution.
I was imprecisely using "captain" in the "person in change" sense, Chief/Commissioner of police would be the more accurate term, and yes they should absolutely be elected.
As for your alleged lesson in civics, the actual matter is covered by the 17th amendment to the constitution, which states:
> When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
- U.S. Cons. amend. XVII § 2, emphasis mine
So then the question is how has the CA legislature directed the executive thereof to make temporary appointments? The answer to that lies in the California Code:
> If a vacancy occurs in the representation of this state in the Senate of the United States, the Governor may appoint and commission an elector of this state who possesses the qualifications for the office to temporarily fill the vacancy until a person is elected at a statewide general election...
- Cal. Elec. Code § 10720, emphasis mine
So we're left with a very simple question: Was Laphonza Butler an elector of the state of CA at the time she was appointed to fill the vacancy by Gavin? If not, Gavin was operating outside his authority as granted by the CA Legislature, and accordingly in volition of the 17th amendment to the US Constitution.
And the answer to that is very simple, a resounding "No":
> Butler is a longtime California resident but now lives in Maryland. She owns a home in California also. The governor’s office said she would re-register to vote in California soon.
That’s part of the ploy. Give people a million menial jobs to elect so they feel exhausted by the process instead of demanding to have control over the real power.
See also the California senators, which have at this point been unilaterally appointed by Gavin rather than elected by the people. If that wasn’t bad enough, he appointed this latest one based on a personal promise made to put a Black woman in the seat, in exchange for some union to aid in his personal election campaign.
If anyone cared about civics, separation of power, or indeed democracy itself, there’d be rioting in the streets.
You’re saying part of the problem is people overwhelmed by menial job elections yet say people should elect police captains. Should they then also elect deputy police chiefs, police chiefs? Also, anyone that knows their civics would know that what Newsome did is covered in the US Constitution.
I was imprecisely using "captain" in the "person in change" sense, Chief/Commissioner of police would be the more accurate term, and yes they should absolutely be elected.
As for your alleged lesson in civics, the actual matter is covered by the 17th amendment to the constitution, which states:
> When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
- U.S. Cons. amend. XVII § 2, emphasis mine
So then the question is how has the CA legislature directed the executive thereof to make temporary appointments? The answer to that lies in the California Code:
> If a vacancy occurs in the representation of this state in the Senate of the United States, the Governor may appoint and commission an elector of this state who possesses the qualifications for the office to temporarily fill the vacancy until a person is elected at a statewide general election...
- Cal. Elec. Code § 10720, emphasis mine
So we're left with a very simple question: Was Laphonza Butler an elector of the state of CA at the time she was appointed to fill the vacancy by Gavin? If not, Gavin was operating outside his authority as granted by the CA Legislature, and accordingly in volition of the 17th amendment to the US Constitution.
And the answer to that is very simple, a resounding "No":
> Butler is a longtime California resident but now lives in Maryland. She owns a home in California also. The governor’s office said she would re-register to vote in California soon.
- https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/laphonza-butler..., emphasis mine