Poll: How should the US Constitution be ammended
- Thread starter gdnp
- Start date
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
We have too extremes here. Tsuska who seems to want to reduce state governments to the level of just being administrative organs for the Federal Government, and Jerome, who wants to go back to the Articles of Confederation. I will take the middle road, like we have now.
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2006
- Messages
- 15,302
Don't be so wishy washy. We're at war, pick a side!
Suddenly
No Punting
Reminds me. I'm for some reason choosing some award for a local High School by interviewing kids.
I ask the question in the title to each candidate.
One girl immediately responds: "Change the titles of nobility provision so I can be Queen."
Guess who I picked...
I ask the question in the title to each candidate.
One girl immediately responds: "Change the titles of nobility provision so I can be Queen."
Guess who I picked...
SezMe
post-pre-born
Fun? Absolutely. Being a Hollywood type, the governator was able to stage manage his campaign events like no other. During his first run, he could have run for every state office and won them all.That would be native born, good sir! Plus, the governator could have run. And come on, that would have been fun, no?
The aftermath? Not so fun. The governator has been a decidedly mixed blessing. He orginally ran to "blow up the boxes [on the state organization chart]", "cut up the credit cards" and eliminate Grey Davis' "pay-to-play" blackmail scheme.
In his six (I think) years in office, the state is no better organized, the state's debt has grown by billions, and he has (contrary to his campaign pledge) sucked up the special interest/corporate money in a way that puts ol' Grey Davis to shame.
He has had some bright spots such as standing up to the EPA on environmental issues.
All that said, it may be that California state government is an unfixable wreck and Ahhhnold has done what could be done. And I say that as a native Californian.
/rant /OT
SezMe
post-pre-born
Republicans. They have had and still have an unquenchable erection for The Gipper.
/OT Sorry, I seem to be late to this thread.
Last edited:
SezMe
post-pre-born
I think there is a forest/trees problem here. More fundamental to the question of US Territories voting is the question of the very existence of such. Why, for example, is Puerto Rico a US Territory? Where in the Constitution is that provided for?
No, I don't think the issue of US Territories voting should be in the Constitution. Rather, I think there should be US States and their citizens or independent countries. The existence of US Territories creates something which, constitutionally, is neither fish nor fowl but sure is foul.
SezMe
post-pre-born
I think you meant "brake" instead of "throttle"?
Now I know why my insurance rates are so high.
SezMe
post-pre-born
California instituted term limits a while ago and I was an enthusiastic supporter. But in retrospect, it has not solved the problem it was designed to fix and maybe made it worse.
Yes, the re-election rate is an indicator of a problem but I don't think term limits is the solution. I would turn to public financing of elections as a better solution.
I've never understood the appeal of term limits. Continuity and institutional memory is important and elected officials still have to be re-elected so it is kind of self-correcting. I don't hold the same dislike of politicians that many hold. It is a profession that the vast majority of us are not suited for. I guess it goes along with the view that the grass is always greener. My view is if a politician is not making someone mad he is not doing his job.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Sure they are. They are a way for various citizens to debate issues, try to influence their fellow citizens and make voting decisions. Seems to me to be the very essence of the democratic process.
As a personal aside, I certainly get a lot out of the perspective of certain thoughtful posters here who hold far different political views than I do. It's the E in JREF.
You're absolutely correct. OTOH, I cannot find any restrictions on furriners expressing their opinions and creating polls.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Gawd, this post the quintessential example of why JDG is the astrology column of the JREF fora, namely, for purely entertainment purposes. McCain is a commie. He has voted with Bush 100% in 2008 and 95% in 2007. By inference, Bush is a commie. But Bush is a Republican. So Republicans are commies.John McCain is a commie.
Check his voting record.
Help, please. Somebody. I'm laughing so hard I need resuscitation.
SezMe
post-pre-born
I do notice and I do agree completely. But I would hope that you see this observation applying equally to the loons on the left and the retards on the right.
Gawd, this post the quintessential example of why JDG is the astrology column of the JREF fora, namely, for purely entertainment purposes. McCain is a commie. He has voted with Bush 100% in 2008 and 95% in 2007. By inference, Bush is a commie. But Bush is a Republican. So Republicans are commies.
Help, please. Somebody. I'm laughing so hard I need resuscitation.
Well there is a segment of the right that includes the John Birch Society that accused Reagan of being a "commie" plant. The Ron Paul Campaign was very closely tied to the JBS.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Not so. California has a "one object rule" for proposed amendments to the state constitution that are on the ballot. And California adopted term limits. If both ideas can become law in one state, why not at the federal level? I'm not arguing it is likely, just that it just might be possible.
SezMe
post-pre-born
Actually, I agree with JDG that this is a good thread to discuss this matter (thereby insulating me from accusations that I think JDG is a useless troll
)I would amend the 14th to put the word "natural" after the first word. My intent would be to disallow corporations from being "citizens" which, IMO, has caused untold damage to our nation.
But that said, I am about as far from a Libertarian (note the capital "L") as one can get. Can you elaborate on why disallowing corporations to be citizens would have negative consequences?
Thanks.
SezMe
post-pre-born
I've made a lot of posts in the last few minutes but my excuse is that I think this thread is really fascinating.
Last edited:
US territories have existed since the Louisiana Purchase at least. Puerto Rico is the territory that would have the most obvious claim on statehood, and they would have it IMHO if they wanted it. Given the choice between maintaining their current colonial status, independence, and statehood, the people have several times voted to remain a colony. Eventually, I think they will become a state or independent.
The US Virgin Islands are too small to make a state: the total population is only about 100,000, not even a particularly large city. I suppose that they could be annexed by Puerto Rico if Puerto Rico were to becomes a state.
That is why I don't like your suggestion of statehood or independence. It is hard to argue that a territory too small to make a viable state would make a viable country, worthy of the same UN voting rights in the general assembly as China.
I suppose as a compromise, the territories could be annexed to existing states. Guam and the other Pacific territories to Hawaii, the Caribbean states to Florida. Other than giving them a voice in Federal government, not sure what benefit this would bring.
I suppose the gorilla in the living room of "territories" that we have not discussed is the District of Columbia. It would take a constitutional amendment to change its status. Any takers?