BTW, both VP De Castro and Sen. Lacson both won as Senators in 2001 and both ran for different posts as VP and President respectively in 2004.

De Castro became VP while Lacson served out his term in the Senate after he lost.

At present, such can happen when there are intervening terms like the Senate members (and probably the Barangay officials but their terms and elections are frequently altered by law that I don’t know when the next barangay elections are) who serve for 6 years while most elective officialdom serve for 3 years.

It can also happen for the president and VP but they are hardly expected to relinquish their present office to run for another intervening official’s term.

Raul Roco ran for President while still having another 3 years in the Senate in 1998. Unlike then Sen. Gloria Arroyo who won for the VP, Roco lost but was not removed as a Senator and even played his role as a juror in the impeachment of the winner of the Presidency at that time.

Justice Cruz says that Art. 67 of the Omnibus Election code addresses that wherein one would be stripped of the elected post (consequently losing whatever years the official still has left) if one ran for a different post.

He also stated that it was repealed but the repeal was somewhat illegal in manner.

The SC however will not rule on this unless someone presents this case before them.

We have a policy that when a politician run for another position (other than re-election) he or she has to resign the current elected position first. No such thing as double dipping.

I don’t recall a 13th Senator winning in 1998 to take her place in the Senate.

Tell your sis, that she can contribute on line, any amount will do. And remember, she’ll get back 75% in tax refunds and thanks….

Neither do I all those credit-grabbing claims of the Arroyo government.

thanks for the info, i’ll make sure to let my sister know (if she doesn’t know already, she was always the more politically active among us). whereabouts in Canada are you? to give you an idea of where we’re from, we voted for Hurricane Hazel (again) last year.

supremo:

i had a feeling this was going to be brought up by one of our legal experts sooner or later. but how can one justify the election of the 13 and 14?

tagabukid:

ahahahah!

“M’am… may firewall daw, blocked yung packets galing sa atin… ah, ewan ko po ba!”

Computerization of Votings and Countings, and even registration and keeping records of voters’ list may make life easier for the Elections peoples and voters, but would it minimize or prevent cheatings and frauds? I doubt it very much, if fraudsters and cheaters remain free instead of being in jails and punish to the fullest.

That’s where the real fraud is or was… Abalos made sure the computerization would fail by rigging the bids. The ‘Operators’ would surely have a hard time tampering with the results, what with their limited digital instincts.

Can you imagine how the Garci conversation would have transpired if the elections were computerized as early as 2004?

“GMA: Hello, Garci? …E yung pagpataas? …yung pagpataas ng 1M?”

“Garci: Sorry Ma’am, di na po ma-overwrite e, na-upload na sa server, na-transmit na po. Computerized na kasi e, di ko masyado ma-gets…”