If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 12:30:07 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.)
  If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be  (Read 72018 times)
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,920
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« on: January 07, 2016, 01:42:45 AM »
« edited: January 07, 2016, 01:48:55 AM by Virginia »


That seems a bit harsh, no? Part of the reason we have so much gridlock is because of the 60-vote cloture rule, which is self-imposed. Abolish that, and things start moving more often. Maybe not always favorable things, but still. The Senate used to represent the states, but now it essentially serves as a check on the House, which is a reactionary chamber for the ever-evolving public opinion. It still has a purpose, and abolishing it would probably lead to some constant legislative chaos. Especially given how partisan things have become.

As for my amendment, I liked some of yours, but I would add a Right to Vote amendment, similar to the one Illinois passed, except with added wording regarding no discrimination based on political ideology. If we had this, we wouldn't still be playing the voter suppression game.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,920
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2016, 12:11:11 PM »
« Edited: February 07, 2016, 12:13:21 PM by Virginia »

A lot of the authors concerns about early voting are about preventing fraud. Why wouldn't you want to vote the day after your taxes are due? Or let the states veto a Supreme Court decision, or a balanced budget amendment?

That reminds me of the aging boomers who have been told all their life that restarting their computer will fix everything. Likewise, conservatives willing to believe have been told all their lives that virtually anything that makes voting more inconvenient will help fight fraud. Unless the reasoning is that the more time available to vote, the more time for fraud (which would be a terribly stupid thought), then cutting early voting does absolutely nothing to fight fraud - Which is practically non-existent to begin with. For a guy who wrote a book about all this, you would think he would actually research whether or not it would help anything at all. He's either just ignorant about the topic or he's willfully furthering the GOP's case for voting restrictions simply to boost their electoral prospects by making it harder/more annoying for Democratic-leaning groups to vote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.015 seconds with 10 queries.