regions and districts

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Thats because you created it, Harry

The regions need 10 states, and the distriicts need equal members, as per the constitution.

We can't change regions once they are set, and once we have senators for those regions-they are permanent, as it says in the constitution-so, lets settle it now.

I'll create a new thread JUST for 10 state proposals. I know it it the 50 millionth one, but we really need to get this right.

The 10-state idea is in Amendment IV of the constitution proposed by DemRepDan.  We didn't approve this amendment...we approved an alternative map that doesn't have exactly ten states in each region.  But their is nothing in the part of the Constitution that we approved (the main body) that mandates 10-state regions.

[dunn]

Thats because you created it, Harry

The regions need 10 states, and the distriicts need equal members, as per the constitution.

We can't change regions once they are set, and once we have senators for those regions-they are permanent, as it says in the constitution-so, lets settle it now.

I'll create a new thread JUST for 10 state proposals. I know it it the 50 millionth one, but we really need to get this right.

The 10-state idea is in Amendment IV of the constitution proposed by DemRepDan.  We didn't approve this amendment...we approved an alternative map that doesn't have exactly ten states in each region.  But their is nothing in the part of the Constitution that we approved (the main body) that mandates 10-state regions.

exectly

[7,052,770]

Thats because you created it, Harry

The regions need 10 states, and the distriicts need equal members, as per the constitution.

We can't change regions once they are set, and once we have senators for those regions-they are permanent, as it says in the constitution-so, lets settle it now.

I'll create a new thread JUST for 10 state proposals. I know it it the 50 millionth one, but we really need to get this right.

The regions don't need 10 states.  Population wise and forum member wise is a great way.

[Fritz]

The 10-state idea is in Amendment IV of the constitution proposed by DemRepDan.  We didn't approve this amendment...we approved an alternative map that doesn't have exactly ten states in each region.  But their is nothing in the part of the Constitution that we approved (the main body) that mandates 10-state regions.

NickG raises an excellent point that completely and utterly refutes my previous argument.

However, it remains that the language of Amendment IV needs to be revised, as the regions do not in fact have 10 states.

[Gustaf]

The 10-state idea is in Amendment IV of the constitution proposed by DemRepDan.  We didn't approve this amendment...we approved an alternative map that doesn't have exactly ten states in each region.  But their is nothing in the part of the Constitution that we approved (the main body) that mandates 10-state regions.

NickG raises an excellent point that completely and utterly refutes my previous argument.

However, it remains that the language of Amendment IV needs to be revised, as the regions do not in fact have 10 states.

The vote was contradictory and thus invalid, imho.

[Fritz]

The vote was contradictory and thus invalid, imho.

Yes, it was.  I have made this point in other threads.  For example:

The Regions map contradicts the Amendment which was approved in the same vote.  The Amendment- which passed- clearly calls for 10-state regions.  Then a plan was included in the choices that did not include 10-state regions.  This would be similiar to holding a vote on what color of yellow bananas we ought to have- yellow, blue, or purple.

Even Gustaf says he didn't understand the vote, and Gustaf is the #1 poster in this forum and everyone seems to like him.