|
Post by captbudman on Nov 7, 2024 13:33:31 GMT -6
With the fascist dictator at the helm with both houses, how will that happen? Positive side 4 years till th enext election. -IF we have an election. -If we still have democracy. If Trump hasn't handed this country over to Putin. TDS strikes again!Again? Stiffy never recovered from his long-haulers TDS!
|
|
|
Post by onemizzou on Nov 7, 2024 13:34:33 GMT -6
I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. I can argue both sides and both sides have valid arguments. But the idea that this 'institution' can be eliminated at any time by a simple majority is stupid. Let's either put it in the Constitution to protect it or eliminate it. I think it is an important tool for the minority party to defend against extreme ideas. If the idea is a good one, it will be passed. If the filibuster is improperly used, the minority Senators in purple states will lose their jobs. But I agree with your suggestion. We probably need to do a refresh on the Constitution anyway.What the hell does this mean, comrade?
|
|
|
Post by stargatebabe on Nov 7, 2024 14:20:46 GMT -6
Again? Stiffy never recovered from his long-haulers TDS! I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt - foolish, I know!
|
|
Nano
Junior Member
Posts: 327
|
Hey Dems,
Nov 7, 2024 17:21:49 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Nano on Nov 7, 2024 17:21:49 GMT -6
I think it is an important tool for the minority party to defend against extreme ideas. If the idea is a good one, it will be passed. If the filibuster is improperly used, the minority Senators in purple states will lose their jobs. But I agree with your suggestion. We probably need to do a refresh on the Constitution anyway.What the hell does this mean, comrade? There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election.
|
|
|
Post by showme1960 on Nov 7, 2024 22:05:54 GMT -6
What the hell does this mean, comrade? There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. Birth right citizenship is not an issue if the federal government properly secures our borders. Concerning election financing, Harris outspent Trump 1 billion dollars to 400 million and still lost. Supreme court term limits are a purely partisan issue that is only pushed by liberals because they've lost control of the court. The constitution has an amendment process that would work just fine for real issues. I have no trust for modern politicians to write something that could improve on the constitution. They would just stuff it full of partisan solutions that would not work well for the American people. Just review any spending bill for an example of what our modern politicians are capable of.
|
|
Nano
Junior Member
Posts: 327
|
Hey Dems,
Nov 8, 2024 0:42:26 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Nano on Nov 8, 2024 0:42:26 GMT -6
There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. Birth right citizenship is not an issue if the federal government properly secures our borders. Concerning election financing, Harris outspent Trump 1 billion dollars to 400 million and still lost. Supreme court term limits are a purely partisan issue that is only pushed by liberals because they've lost control of the court. The constitution has an amendment process that would work just fine for real issues. I have no trust for modern politicians to write something that could improve on the constitution. They would just stuff it full of partisan solutions that would not work well for the American people. Just review any spending bill for an example of what our modern politicians are capable of. You people really are defective. You obviously don't understand how the amendment process works. What a shock.
|
|
|
Post by captbudman on Nov 8, 2024 10:21:39 GMT -6
What the hell does this mean, comrade? There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. Missouri's Constitution is the either the most modified in the nation or second behind Louisiana (which is under Napoleonic Code, not Common Law). A simple majority of voters is all that's required. America is divided politically, so it's unlikely that any Constitutional Amendment will be easily passed. The Supreme Court needs its size fixed before term limits. I also don't see why we need term limits based upon the historical record of the court; term limits seems like an alternative way to say "we don't like Justice X." Likewise, we do have the option to term limit Congress every 2 years and the Senate every 6 years. If Congress rotates quicker, than the permanent staff in Congress will be the ones drafting our legislation (which they are basically doing anyway). Campaign financing will be another amendment requirement because you are limiting free speech. The easier way to reign it in is to start taxing donations to political action committees with a progressive rate (high dollar donations at a higher tax rate). That will require actual proof of who donates to avoid the Act Blue fraud of some guy in New Orleans on Social Security making 18K each $20 donations per year. Finally, Congress can end anchor babies. American Indian tribes were never US citizens until the Snyder Act (Indian Citizenship Act of 1924) made them citizens. Congress never granted foreigners citizenship; it was the permanent, unelected, unaccountable, and unfireable incompetent bureaucracy in government that started issuing them. Immigrants (legal or tourist) owe their loyalty to foreign governments, and hence, aren't eligible for citizenship. Trump could simply pass an executive order recognizing this and banning social security numbers being issued, but Congress should pass a law clarifying this. No amendment is required. The one other amendment that you didn't mention is adding new States -- this should require the legislatures of the respective States to approve. Otherwise, if a radical leftist government gets in power, they will push to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC to make States, giving Dems two to four more Senators (and potential majority).
|
|
|
Hey Dems,
Nov 8, 2024 10:28:19 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Aesa on Nov 8, 2024 10:28:19 GMT -6
There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. Missouri's Constitution is the either the most modified in the nation or second behind Louisiana (which is under Napoleonic Code, not Common Law). A simple majority of voters is all that's required. America is divided politically, so it's unlikely that any Constitutional Amendment will be easily passed. The Supreme Court needs its size fixed before term limits. I also don't see why we need term limits based upon the historical record of the court; term limits seems like an alternative way to say "we don't like Justice X." Likewise, we do have the option to term limit Congress every 2 years and the Senate every 6 years. If Congress rotates quicker, than the permanent staff in Congress will be the ones drafting our legislation (which they are basically doing anyway). Campaign financing will be another amendment requirement because you are limiting free speech. The easier way to reign it in is to start taxing donations to political action committees with a progressive rate (high dollar donations at a higher tax rate). That will require actual proof of who donates to avoid the Act Blue fraud of some guy in New Orleans on Social Security making 18K each $20 donations per year. Finally, Congress can end anchor babies. American Indian tribes were never US citizens until the Snyder Act (Indian Citizenship Act of 1924) made them citizens. Congress never granted foreigners citizenship; it was the permanent, unelected, unaccountable, and unfireable incompetent bureaucracy in government that started issuing them. Immigrants (legal or tourist) owe their loyalty to foreign governments, and hence, aren't eligible for citizenship. Trump could simply pass an executive order recognizing this and banning social security numbers being issued, but Congress should pass a law clarifying this. No amendment is required. The one other amendment that you didn't mention is adding new States -- this should require the legislatures of the respective States to approve. Otherwise, if a radical leftist government gets in power, they will push to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC to make States, giving Dems two to four more Senators (and potential majority). Puerto Rico, last I looked, does not want statehood. DC on the other had, has a very heavy Demoncrat population and would undoubtedly welcome it, just for the Senate seats.
|
|
|
Post by captbudman on Nov 8, 2024 10:44:57 GMT -6
Missouri's Constitution is the either the most modified in the nation or second behind Louisiana (which is under Napoleonic Code, not Common Law). A simple majority of voters is all that's required. America is divided politically, so it's unlikely that any Constitutional Amendment will be easily passed. The Supreme Court needs its size fixed before term limits. I also don't see why we need term limits based upon the historical record of the court; term limits seems like an alternative way to say "we don't like Justice X." Likewise, we do have the option to term limit Congress every 2 years and the Senate every 6 years. If Congress rotates quicker, than the permanent staff in Congress will be the ones drafting our legislation (which they are basically doing anyway). Campaign financing will be another amendment requirement because you are limiting free speech. The easier way to reign it in is to start taxing donations to political action committees with a progressive rate (high dollar donations at a higher tax rate). That will require actual proof of who donates to avoid the Act Blue fraud of some guy in New Orleans on Social Security making 18K each $20 donations per year. Finally, Congress can end anchor babies. American Indian tribes were never US citizens until the Snyder Act (Indian Citizenship Act of 1924) made them citizens. Congress never granted foreigners citizenship; it was the permanent, unelected, unaccountable, and unfireable incompetent bureaucracy in government that started issuing them. Immigrants (legal or tourist) owe their loyalty to foreign governments, and hence, aren't eligible for citizenship. Trump could simply pass an executive order recognizing this and banning social security numbers being issued, but Congress should pass a law clarifying this. No amendment is required. The one other amendment that you didn't mention is adding new States -- this should require the legislatures of the respective States to approve. Otherwise, if a radical leftist government gets in power, they will push to make Puerto Rico and Washington DC to make States, giving Dems two to four more Senators (and potential majority). Puerto Rico, last I looked, does not want statehood. DC on the other had, has a very heavy Demoncrat population and would undoubtedly welcome it, just for the Senate seats. There was a movement decades ago for independence, not Statehood. We don't need to take the risk of making it a State.
|
|
|
Post by gotscha on Nov 8, 2024 10:59:40 GMT -6
I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. I can argue both sides and both sides have valid arguments. But the idea that this 'institution' can be eliminated at any time by a simple majority is stupid. Let's either put it in the Constitution to protect it or eliminate it. I think it is an important tool for the minority party to defend against extreme ideas. If the idea is a good one, it will be passed. If the filibuster is improperly used, the minority Senators in purple states will lose their jobs. But I agree with your suggestion. We probably need to do a refresh on the Constitution anyway. Our entire federal system is designed to protect the minority against the whims of the majority. Of all of the institutions, only one was intended to represent the people directly - the House of Representatives. The Senate is supposed to represent the states' interests, and until the early 20th century, senators were appointed by the states for that purpose - not elected. Now because Senators stand for popular election they're beholden to whoever donates the most to their campaigns - not the people. And don't forget the Electoral College. It's the only thing that keeps a handful of populous states from running roughshod over the rest of the country. Too many people think every issue should be decided in Washington, D.C. Why should a solution for California be imposed on every other state, just because they have the largest population? The example I like to give is water regulations. What may make sense for a mostly-desert state like California is complete nonsense for a state like Missouri. Missouri doesn't lack fresh water, so why should we have to bow to water restrictions on washers, toilets and shower heads like they do in California? Keep those regulations out of D.C. There are some changes I'd like to see initiated by the states through a constitutional convention: Federal term limits. No way congresscritters will ever vote to limit their own power, but there's a slim chance the states could force them. Balanced Budget Amendment - Same as above. Congress will never do this on their own. Abolish the 17th Amendment. The state legislatures need to appoint senators - not the popular vote. Campaign contributions. If you can't vote for a candidate, you shouldn't be allowed to contribute to their campaign - period. No more out of state money trying to sway local and state elections. Laws not passed in Congress by a 2/3 majority automatically sunset in ten years. If your idea is so good that it should last into perpetuity, you can get a super majority to agree. If it's not that good, let it be reevaluated in ten years. If it was a great idea ten years ago, you should be able to get a super majority. If not, it goes away.
|
|
|
Post by onemizzou on Nov 8, 2024 11:35:16 GMT -6
What the hell does this mean, comrade? There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. I can agree that birthright citizenship should be ended. You can't just run across the border and then drop an anchor baby. If at least one of the parents isn't a citizen then the child isn't a citizen. However, if they do have a US birth certificate they should be allowed resident status (i.e. Green Card) when they turn 18, if they want it. I'm not in favor of term limits in Congress because then you'll have a perpetual freshman Congress and there are issues that need experienced leaders to deal with. With a continually inexperienced Congress they'll rely on lobbyists or hired staff (i.e. people that have experience) and then you basically have non-elected people running the country. I'm a definite "no" on Supreme Court Justice term limits. The left NEVER talked about this when they had a majority or at least a couple moderates that would vote their way on certain issues. It's a big issue now that the court has justices that apply the Constitution and not their feelings to judgements. FYI, states SHOULD re-examine their constitutions frequently. That's is where new ideas come from. The federal govt. should only consider change when it's been thoroughly vetted in the states. For instance, legalized marijuana is a clear failure for society and our country and needs to be re-criminalized. That experiment is over.
|
|
|
Post by onemizzou on Nov 8, 2024 11:39:45 GMT -6
There are a lot of modern issues not addressed that should be. Birth right citizenship is a great example. Federal election financing is another. Congressional and supreme court term limits a 3rd. Many more. Missouri has a ballot measure to amend its constitution practically every presidential election. Birth right citizenship is not an issue if the federal government properly secures our borders. Concerning election financing, Harris outspent Trump 1 billion dollars to 400 million and still lost. Supreme court term limits are a purely partisan issue that is only pushed by liberals because they've lost control of the court. The constitution has an amendment process that would work just fine for real issues. I have no trust for modern politicians to write something that could improve on the constitution. They would just stuff it full of partisan solutions that would not work well for the American people. Just review any spending bill for an example of what our modern politicians are capable of. Nailed it. Like is said in my response no Constitutional issue should be brought to the Federal level until properly vetted among the states.
|
|
|
Post by stiffy1957 on Nov 8, 2024 11:42:09 GMT -6
My tears will be your tears. We are in the same boat.You just can't se it now. You will when it is you. You can cool it with the overdramatic bullshit. You lost. Act like an adult. We all lost.You included. You haven't got sense to see it yet. You will. You don't see me whining to say it was rigged. Our elections are fair. The only one interring in it was always Trump.
|
|
|
Hey Dems,
Nov 8, 2024 11:44:31 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by mikeinez on Nov 8, 2024 11:44:31 GMT -6
You can cool it with the overdramatic bullshit. You lost. Act like an adult. We all lost.You included. You haven't got sense to see it yet. You will. You don't see me whining to say it was rigged. Our elections are fair. The only one interring in it was always Trump. So you aren't whining that it was rigged and then immediately accuse Trump of interfering.
|
|
|
Post by Billy John Davy on Nov 8, 2024 12:19:56 GMT -6
You can cool it with the overdramatic bullshit. You lost. Act like an adult. We all lost. No tard, decent Americans won bigly. Competence is returning to the WH. the days of gender freaks and diversity hires running government agencies is OVER now continue to enjoy your lowered tax rate, leech.
|
|