(WA) Taxpayers foot the bill for Rossi's election challenge

[merwin]

Taxpayers foot the bill for Rossi's election challenge

By REBECCA COOK
Associated Press writer

OLYMPIA, Wash. — Whoever wins the legal challenge to the governor's election, the citizens of Washington will pay.

In fact, they're already paying.

The state expects to spend about $200,000 of taxpayer money on private lawyers defending the Secretary of State's office.
...
Rossi and the state Republican Party filed their election challenge in Chelan County Superior Court, suing the state and all 39 counties. They allege that hundreds of illegal ballots were counted and they're asking Judge John E. Bridges to nullify the super-close governor's election. The state Democratic Party intervened in the case, saying the GOP's challenge is unconstitutional and their evidence is too weak to justify throwing out election results.
...
"It's safe to say that the Rossi lawsuit is consuming a significant chunk of our resources, even though we are, in comparison to other parties, a minor player,'' said Island County Prosecuting Attorney Greg Banks, who is also prosecuting two new murder cases.

Rossi ran as a fiscal conservative, and his supporters say they hate to see taxpayer dollars going down the drain for a lawsuit. But many say Rossi is doing the right thing.

-----------

So, all their whining about how the recount was going to cost taxpayers money doesn't matter at all anymore. 'Do as i say not as i do!'

[Cocoa]

1. is anyone on TV telling Rossi to "get over it?"

no, the story of the republican fighting the election result after the governor has been sworn in is totally absent from TV.

[merwin]

15. The focus on the TV is actually 'Oh, poor Rossi'

[skylarmae]

2. I forget, which one of the Repuke 10 Commandments is

'Do as I say...'? What's really scary though IMO, is that the race was so close when this Rossi seems to be such a dick!

[merwin]

3. He played himself as a friend to all... a moderate... a nice guy.

blah.

[Missy Vixen]

9. We warned everyone we know

>What's really scary though IMO, is that the race was so close when this Rossi seems to be such a dick!<

I had occasion to attend a dinner for local politicians about a year and a half ago. There were only about 50 people in the room. The minute the banquet room doors shut (and Dino Rossi thought he was among friends,) the "moderate", "friendly" mask came right off. It was incredible. I was stunned to learn, though, that numerous people we spoke with about my experience still voted for him. They bought the warm, fuzzy and friendly image carefully crafted by those who made his campaign ads. Negative campaigning works, especially when one is surrounded by cyooooot kids and parroting the "family values" schtick.

Julie

[gratuitous]

4. Hmm, but Gregoire had to pay for the hand recount herself

Odd, isn't it, how skilled Republicans are at spending other people's money, and then they have the nerve to paint themselves as the fiscally responsible party. A working, functional Fourth Estate would point this out, methinks.

[ezee]

10. The Dem. party paida deposit for the recount,

upfront. Had Gregorie lost the recount then they would have had to pay. Because she didn't lose the recount the Democratic party was given back its money and the taxpayers are paying the bill. I am happy to see my tax dollars being used this way.

[Fenris]

5. That guy is such a douche.

Get over it, Dino.

[VegasWolf]

6. One thing though, the repukes have enough balls to challenge an

election.

[gratuitous]

8. How do you think Gregoire won?

She took on the suspect election results, made her challenges within the election system and the law, and paid for a hand recount herself, and won vindication. What Rossi's trying to do has no foundation in Washington law or practice, and he's hoping to stampede public opinion for an unprecedented election "mulligan."

I don't rightly know what body part Rossi's extra-legal temper tantrum involves, but testicles doesn't readily suggest itself, at least to me.

[flamingyouth]

7. Dino Rossi:

You suck.:mad:

[Missy Vixen]

11. You go, girl

Dino has a bad case of cranial-rectal inversion, doesn't he?

In the meantime, I'm hoping he's making himself politically radioactive. Permanently.

Julie

p.s. :yourock:

[Gman]

12. It's time to move on..

and let it go. The election has been over for almost 3 months now. The GOP needs to get over it and move on rather than be a

Sore Loserman

[mirror]

13. Tax Payers Free To Ignore An IRS Summons

ueensbury, NY � On January 25, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that taxpayers cannot be compelled by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS, absent a federal court order.

Quoting from the decision (Schulz v. IRS, Case No. 04-0196-cv),

�...absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses apply no force to taxpayers, and no consequence whatever can befall a taxpayer who refuses, ignores, or otherwise does not comply with an IRS summons until that summons is backed by a federal court order� cannot be held in contempt, arrested, detained, or otherwise punished for refusing to comply with the original IRS summons, no matter the taxpayer's reasons, or lack of reasons for so refusing.�

Without declaring those provisions of the Code unconstitutional on their face, the court, in effect, nullified key enforcement provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, stripping the IRS of much of its power to compel compliance with its administrative demands for personal and private property. The court characterized IRS summonses issued under Section 7602 as mere �requests.�

The court went on to say that the federal courts are there to protect taxpayers from an �overreaching� IRS, and that the IRS must go through the federal courts before force can be applied on anyone by the IRS to turn over personal and private property to the IRS.


Key Enforcement Provisions Of The
Internal Revenue Code Nullified

The paragraphs above begin a press release that will be sent to thousands of media outlets and influential individuals across the nation over the next several days.

The evolution of this lawsuit, Schulz v. IRS, has played an integral role in the execution of the Right-to-Petition lawsuit strategy and may soon, after the conclusive and far-reaching decision of the Appellate Court, provide the legal basis necessary to finalize, and secure jurisdiction over the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice to answer our claims of constitutional abuse.

In their decision in this case brought by WTP Chairman Bob Schulz, the court has expressly recognized that the IRS, as has been asserted in the Right-to-Petition lawsuit, routinely violates people's Due Process rights in their day-to-day administrative practices. As such, the findings of the Second Circuit firmly establish for the (D.C.) District Court the substance of the causes of action put forth in our Right-to-Petition lawsuit.

In the coming days, WTP Chairman Bob Schulz will make further statements about these unfolding events and detail our assertive plans to generate widespread public awareness of our efforts, and our success

[librechik]

14. outrageous! While Dems had to pass the hat for Ohio! n/t