Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo

HP - Would The Old Rick Perry Be Calling For Governor Perry To Resign?


Recommended Posts


First Posted: 8/12/11 02:02 PM ET Updated: 8/12/11 02:03 PM ET


WASHINGTON -- At some point this weekend, whether on a stage in South Carolina or Iowa, Texas Governor Rick Perry is expected step up to a microphone, put an end to months of media speculation and formally announce his bid for the presidency.

But in doing so, Perry would be violating the spirit of an amendment he proposed to the Texas constitution in 1989. Filed that March, the amendment called for "the automatic resignation from office of certain public officials seeking other elective office."

In other words, the 1989 version of Perry would probably think Governor Perry should resign from office before hopping on that plane to South Carolina.

Perry's amendment [PDF] did not equivocate:

"The candidacy constitutes an automatic resignation of the office then held, and the vacancy created shall be filled pursuant to law in the same manner as other vacancies for the office are filled."

The forced resignation would kick in for anyone holding elected office that paid $10,000 or more per year. Governor Perry certainly falls into that category.

But in his 1989 proposal, Perry may have left the future Governor Perry an out. The forced resignation would only kick in if the elected official decided to run within the first 180 days of their term in office. His announcement this weekend would have put him just outside that 180 day window.

Still, Perry told Time's Mark Halperin he had already decided on a run more than a month ago, which would have been before the 180 days window closed.

Back when he wrote the amendment, Perry was a Democrat and far removed from any consideration of national office, let alone anyone's favorite in a statewide contest. He was a just state representative from west Texas. His proposed amendment failed.

"In 1989, Dem State Rep. Rick Perry believed that if a governor of Texas early in their term wanted to run for president, they should resign," says Jeff Rotkoff, a consultant with the Back to Basics PAC, a Texas political action committee that opposes Perry. "Why doesn't he stand by that belief today? Does he stand by that belief today? If not, what's changed?"

Long-time Perry campaign strategist David Carney referred a request for comment to the governor's press office. The governor's media team in Austin did return a request for comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thought for years that if you're running for an office that you're not currently holding (so re-election) that you should be forced to resign. Never liked the idea of a governor being paid to be governor while he's out of the state running for President, or Senate, or whatever. Same with Congress running for any office other than the one they hold. But that would require the people who would hate such laws to pass them, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with that attitude is that, let's face it, every Governor and every person in the US Senate wants to be President. It's the only promotion they can aspire to.

IMO, there are exactly two kings of politicians in those jobs (Governor, or US Senate)

  1. Those that are actively running for President.
  2. And those that know they've got no chance, so they say they aren't interested. (While still trying to figure out how to get there, and working for their chance.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with that attitude is that, let's face it, every Governor and every person in the US Senate wants to be President.

That is simply not true.

Many of them have no desire for all the hassle that comes with running for, and/or becoming President.

A lot of them, for example, enjoy the privacy that their current family experiences, and don't wish to be disected by the media and entire society, that a presidential campaign would bring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he is technically complying with a bill he proposed and you wish to bash him for it? :pfft:

I do agree he and any others should resign though....including Obama if he wishes to campaign:D

That would cut down some of this BS


How about we propose a law that forbids a incumbent from campaigning?

Making them run solely on their record would cut down the incumbency issue and probably reduce graft.

Do we really need a sitting office holder to spend millions telling us how well he did his job? (though I admit Barry might need a Billion to sell his record :ols:)

---------- Post added August-12th-2011 at 07:01 PM ----------

The game is afoot.


Bufford...is the writer being deliberately deceptive or is he simply too ****ing ignorant to read what he links?

But writing for Huffpro probably answers that in the affirmative to both ....Minor leaguers :evilg:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...