| Tom Martinak 2004-12-31, 5:45 pm |
| >>From my own perspective, the only case where it might (and I'm not
entirely sure even about that) be reasonable is if it is known that the
candidate is or will be serving time in jail during the period they
would be on the EB.
quote:
>Why is that any different from a candidate who might be unavailable
for some other reason, such as being on active duty in the armed forces
or perhaps on the International Space Station? If the election was
tomorrow and Martha Stewart was a candidate, is her being in jail today
really relevant?
The one difference is that someone in jail would be completely unable
to serve. Someone in the armed forces or on the ISS would be able to
serve to some limited extent. After all, we've had EB members whose
primary attendance was via the phone - and both of your examples would
allow for that (as much as any other job might limit the time
available). In general, someone serving time wouldn't be able to do
even that. Serving jail time during the life of their EB term is on
the edge of being acceptable notification to me. But it probably isn't
necessary as their opponents would be sure to let people know. Maybe a
clearer example than someone who is in jail is someone who has died.
Is there any bylaw that would eliminate a dead person from being
elected - and wouldn't it be useful to mention a recent death to
voters?
- Tom Martinak
|