The Constitution states that the president and vice president

[louis-t]

as candidates cannot reside in the same state. Isn't Dick Cheney from Texas? I have asked many people about this. No one has an answer. Help!

[bookman]

1. He moved..

..his "official" residence to Wyoming.

(wink, wink, nod, nod)

[Bozola]

2. Wyoming

[arcane1]

3. yes, he is...

he changed his residence to Wyoming at the last possible minute (maybe even later than that)

a slimy one, he is..

[Dookus]

4. Cheney...

changed his voter registration to Wyoming shortly before the election. This was taken to court and they ruled that it was acceptable. *shrug*

[proud patriot]

5. Cheney was a resident of Texas until he was asked to run for V.P.

He moved out of state just so he could run on the ticket
w/ chimpy.

[graelent]

6. He pulled a fast one

He registered to vote in Wyoming (I believe) days before it was announced he would be the VP.

In fact, it was Cheney's fast change in voter registration that was thefirst hint he would be VP.

[SoCalDem]

11. They need to use real residency..

Where you received 75% of phone calls
Where you paid 75% of your untilities
Wher you received your mail ..

[petrock2004]

14. word,

i couldn't even rent a movie in my own town without that.
guess i could be a VP though. :P

[Cleita]

20. And require that they lived there at least six months.

It used to be you couldn't claim residency in California until you had lived there for six months, meaning you had a residential address and utilities you paid there. Shouldn't it be the same for candidates?

[catzies]

7. They dodged by making Wyoming Cheney's "official residence."

Even though he hadn't lived there for years; but once again the good puppy media didn't bite.

[tom_paine]

8. Just another early indicator that the Busheviks disregard the law

Though who could have guessed their utter Imperial contempt for the laws that once stood over the Old Americn Republic.

That was the first Orwellian moment of the Imperial Selection of 2000.

[Frodo]

9. He actually had to re-register to vote.

"from TX" isn't the same thing. He maintained multiple residences prior to joining the ticket (as head of Haliburton he probably had one in EACH state). He registered to vote in his home state prior to joining the ticket.

Some Democrats challenged it in court at the appropriate time. It didn't get anywhere.

[ComerPerro]

10. Why is that?

Just curious

[stinkeefresh]

12. I remember reading at the time some funny columnist

saying (paraphrase) "but this is just an old Blue Law, dated from a distant time and was really meant to keep power somewhat divided, so the country couldn't be controlled by, say, two oil men from Texas."

[pinto]

13. here's a report about the original challenge to Cheney's residency

I believe it was thrown out...and as others have posted, Cheney by default had Wyoming residency.


http://quest.cjonline.com/stories/112100/gen_1121007004.shtml

[madison]

15. Although Cheney lived primarily in Texas...

Although Cheney lived primarily in Texas, he did have a vacation house in Wyoming.

So, they got some friend to QUICKLY buy Cheney's Texas house, and Cheney could then claim residency in Wyoming.

Cheney also had to change his voter registration, I think, because he was registered to vote in Texas (but I am NOT sure about that).

Needless to say, if Cheney had been a Democrat and done the same maneuver, he would have been tarred and feathered by the whore media. But he's a Republican, so it was "okay."

[dixiechiken]

16. I can't help but think that Cheney IS going to retire to Wyoming ...

What other possible explanation could there be for this?



<snip>

N.Y. is top terror risk but ranks 49th in aid

By BRIAN KATES
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER


New York, the world's premier target for terror, gets less homeland security funding per person than virtually any state in the nation.

Man for man and woman for woman, Wyoming (population 493,782) does better - $38.31 per person, compared with the paltry $5.47 in counterterrorism funds spent on each New Yorker.

<snip>

So far, though, whatever threat Osama Bin Laden and his terrorist minions pose for Wyoming lurks primarily in the minds of its politicians. New York, on the other hand, has been targeted five times and suffered two horrendous attacks, including, of course, the one on Sept. 11, 2001.

Yet New York goes begging while Cheyenne, Wyo. (population 53,200), now boasts two gleaming, state-of-the-art bomb squad units, special equipment for neutralizing bombs and a new communications system for its 90-member police force, said Police Chief Robert Fecht. And the department expects to receive still more special equipment when a second grant is approved.

<snip>



There was just an article in The Denver Post, (I swear it ran within the last couple of weeks), that reported on a huge chunk of money going to Cheyenne for "Homeland Security" but I'm not sure if it's ANOTHER chunk of money, or the SAME chunk of money talked about in the above article. I searched and searched their website but, unfortunately, couldn't find a damn thing. (The Denver Post sucks.)

[OldSoldier]

24. Cheyenne is home to FE Warren AFB

Which is home to the 20th Air Force and 50 MX "Peacekeeper" ICBMs plus 100 Minuteman III ICBMs.

If you're going to drop a lot of cash into preventing terra, this sounds like a decent place to drop it into.

[mlawson]

17. That's only for Democrats.

The Constitution no longer applies to repukes. ;-)

Don't you see...

[Jacobin]

18. There was a court challenge, because you are absolutely right

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans (full of RWers) held that Cheney, who lived in a home in Dallas, filed a homestead exemption on his house in Texas, worked in Texas and had his cars registered in Texas, was actually (taadaaaa) a resident of Wyoming because he changed his voter registration thingy to Wyoming after he announced for VP.

Fixed much?

[Yupster]

19. You are absolutely wrong

The Constitution says no such thing.

The Constitution says an elector can vote for a presidential and vice-presidential candidate separately, one of which cannot be from the elector's home state. Therefore, there would be nothing wrong with having a Prez and VP both from the same state. However, the electors from that state would not be able to vote for the VP candidate from their own state. Most tmes it would be perfectly fine.

But 2000 would have been interesting.

If this happened last time, if Cheney was ruled to have been from Texas too, then the Texas electors could not have voted for Cheney. They could have voted for Condi Rice for VP. In that case, no one would have had the 270 electoral votes necessary to be elected VP, and the decision would be by majority vote of the senate. The senate could only choose between the two highest electoral vote-getters, which in this case would have been Lieberman and Cheney. Since the senate (if I remember right?) was split just about right down the middle in 1991, this could have been really something, and the whole country would wonder what Jim Jeffords would do.

Sorry for such a long post on a not very important issue, but DU is at its worst when it posts absolutely wrong information, and it gets parroted over and over.

(For a simple explanation of the process, see the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution).

[TahitiNut]

21. One minor quibble ...

... I believe that each individual elector would've been proscribed from voting for both -- but could choose to vote for either a non-Texan Presidential candidate or non-Texan Vice-Presidential candidate. (They wouldn't have to all choose the same "Texan".)

[Yupster]

22. That's true

and it would have been good Republican strategery for the Texas electors to vote for Cheney for VP and Ronald Reagan for Pesident.

Then Cheney would be in and the House would have picked the president out of the top three vote-getters, Gore, Bush and Reagan, and they would vote with one vote per state, so Bush would have won pretty handily since Republicans dominate many more states than Democrats. That way both Bush and Cheney would have gotten in.

[OldSoldier]

23. It doesn't say that

From Article II, Section 1, Clause 3: The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.

it usually translates into "they can't be from the same state" because no one is going into a presidential race with the handicap of not being able to legally take their own state.