Can Connecticut pass a law to allow US Senator to be recalled?

[Fresh_Start]

Could be leverage against lieberman even if its only a bill.

[Zensea]

1. No, no, no

Go read the Constitution.

Senators are under the jurisdiction of the Federal government, not the states.
There is no recall for Senators or Representatives. It would take a constitutional amendment.

[Fresh_Start]

2. That's not what it says...

Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

[Zensea]

3. That's about elections not recalls

What that says is that States determine when elections will be held, where they will be held and how they will be held & that Congress can legislate regarding time and manner.

A recall is not an election.

States can't arbitrarily change the age required to be a Senator either.

There was just a discussion of this on here a few days ago, there probably will be next week too.

Do some googling on the subject ... see if you can find anything that actually says there can be a recall of a U.S. Senator or Representative. You'll find plenty of stuff regarding that there can be a recall of local or state officials, but not of federal officials.

[Fresh_Start]

4. but in the limitations on the states.....

it does not specify that the state cannot recall its own representatives.

[Zensea]

5. You haven't googled have you?

I know there's plenty of info that proves my point readily accessible through google that says just what I wrote earlier.
I found it the other day.
I'm not going to go looking for it again (or provide links) & I'm not going to continue discussing it unless I get some sense that you've made the effort to go look yourself.
I haven't gotten that sense yet.

I'm not particularly interested in wishful thinking on the subject (which serves no real purpose), particularly when I went and read some interpretations of the constitutional questions involved from a judicial perspective the other day already. (plus I have my memory from classwork on this awhile back)

or another way to put it, is your idea is a hypothetical that regardless of whether it is do-able (which I am saying it is not) is not going to happen anyway.

[Fresh_Start]

6. yes I have

including the bit about the federalist papers including discussion of recall.
I understand its an uphill battle. But for the last 6 years we've had a Congress thats put party in front of its citizenry.
I don't see it stopping anytime soon as long as their is so little risk to them.
The dems will cave on the withdrawal deadline.
And no one in DC has any material risk until the 2008 election and that risk is way overblown.
Of course, there will be isolated seats where the people will have an effective grassroots candidate who can beat the establishment.
But 80% of the seats will continue to be held by incumbents and they know it.
You know as well as I do that the probability of a member being kicked out are low especially is such a narrowly split Congress.

[Zensea]

7. I agree with that stuff

Unfortunately I also think the Connecticut voters knew exactly what they were getting which is why I responded the way I did previously (aside from the logistical barriers).

[NewJeffCT]

8. There has been talk about a "sore loser" law

So, Lieberman couldn't run in the primary, lose, and then run in the General.