|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The 2017 Republican Controlled U.S. Congress | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
1954?
http://www.constitution-billofrights.com/...church-and-state Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia 1964 (Johnson) amendment 24 -- amendments can't be overruled by a president -- it takes 2/3rds of house and senate. That won't happen.
quote: Congress Refuses To Free Churches
From Lyndon Johnson Gag Order
Congress Refuses To Free Churches From Lyndon Johnson Gag Order (2002) Trump Attacks Separation Of Church And State With Vow To Totally Destroy Johnson Amendment Trump Attacks Separation Of Church And State With Vow To Totally Destroy Johnson Amendment Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia
quote: About Joe Crow, Not about separation? I'm confused, but I don't think I am the only one. Enjoy? Edited by RAZD, : . Edited by RAZD, : ..by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
quote: There is hope. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
So, Are Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Republican Congress going to protect the voting rights of millions of qualified voters who want to register and who want to vote or are they going to ignore or encourage the barriers to voting that red states have and plan to enact? I believe the SCOTUS is going to take up a case on gerrymandering.
quote: That should be interesting. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The NC districts for 1973-1982 seem to be the most reasonable. Does anyone know what happened between then and now that produced the travesty of the current districting? Is it just that computer data mining is so detailed now that it supports the wishes of the politicians to split the voters so finely? Two things: republican take over of state house and senate and governor and new census giving new population data. The latter usually triggers district adjustments not wholesale revisions.
To me, the party (neither are pure in this) drawing these districts is saying three things: 1. We want to be in power (fine, that's the point of the political party). 2. Our policies, actions, etc. won't win the majority of voters. 3. We won't adjust our policies, actions, etc. to win the majority because we are right not the voters. The minimal good I can see from SCOTUS is the requirement for an independent bi-partisan board to do districting. The maximal good I can see would be a requirement that districts should proportionally reflect the people of the state -- ie population is 10% black districts should have 10% black elected representatives. Of course this would also mean 1/2 representatives should be women ... My own opinion is that state/federal representatives should be chosen by lottery from the voting public and it should be considered civic duty (like jury duty) to serve 2 years and then return to previous job (like national guard returning from oversea assignments). It might (might) make people more attentive to the political issues. I also think that the two senators for the state should be elected by ranked voting of all candidates and the two ending up with the most votes are elected. One can hope. Probably too rational ... Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
I'm more a fan of the idea of merging direct democracy with representative democracy. Basically what we have now but with a mechanism for the public to vote directly on important/contentious issues annually. ... Well I'm certainly in favor of public vote as a check on representative votes, and while we have that in theory with the election of representatives and senators, that has rarely been true in practice. Certainly when it comes to things that directly benefit the politicians, like pay and health benefits and retirement plans, etc., and that these should be subject to the votes of the people paying the bills, not the politicians (Massive conflict of interest). And I am in favor of having ballot initiatives for things like gun controls and minimum living wages, where there is broad public support but can't seem to get anywhere in congress.
... The public vote doesn't necessarily have to be the final say, we could have the public vote count for 50% of the total vote and the reps vote count for the other 50% for example. This would give the public a way to measure how well their reps are actually representing them and the reps a good measure of public opinion. It would also give the general public more reason to pay attention to political issues and a greater feeling of involvement. My 2 cents. Well that is sort of done with polling, and that could be more formalized, plus there are town halls where people can discuss things with their reps.
Protesters swarm Chaffetz town hall Protesters Grill Democratic Senator About His Vote for Trump’s CIA Chief Using prevote polls could help them avoid confrontational town halls. Seems people are a bit more involved with politics since the last elections ... Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Lemme put it back on topic
Possibly the only good thing to come of it. I still find it depressing that third party support is so low in the US, given the candidates. We're off topic though so we should find somewhere else if we want to continue this discussion. Because of the way US elections are run it defaults to two parties. Every time a third party does happen to beat one of the established parties that party usually disappears. This is how the republicans in collusion with the democrats control elections. They set the standards other parties have to meet (15% approval rating to be in debates) and the criteria for being on the ballots. Republican have managed to take this to such an extreme that it is difficult for anyone of any other party to get elected in republican controlled states. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
... We've had significant third parties at least as far back as the 1920s and 30s - notably Labour, Progressive, CCF, Social Credit - when there was little or no regulation. Ballot access restrictions are part of the equation: http://www.sciencedirect.com/...rticle/pii/S0176268004000527
quote: For instance neither Jill Stein nor Gary Johnson were on the ballots in all states. The requirements vary from state to state. Two-party system - Wikipedia
quote: quote: In the US presidential elections the winner must have >50% of the electoral votes, so third parties can disrupt this from happening (throwing the election into the House to decide who they want to be president, and it doesn't have to be a candidate -- this is what should have happened between Bush jr and Gore). The electoral votes are won by "first past the post" (most votes whether majority or not), but all the electoral votes are then allotted by "winner take all" in every state but two, and this tends to put 3rd parties at an extreme disadvantage. This filters to down ballot candidates when people vote for all the party candidates with a single pick on the ballot. For example Perot (running as independent) predominantly took votes from Bush senior in many states, so Clinton won those states by "first past the post" and took all their electoral votes by "winner take all" and that gave him the election. So it is a two-step process, get more votes than other candidates to get all the state electoral votes to win the presidency. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
... but what about the Senate and House? What prevents third parties there? We do see more in state houses, there has even an independent Governor fairly recently. Many rep and sen votes are because of entire ticket votes, and the two parties fighting for president become strong parties in the states. The party in power as governor rules how elections are run, how the ballots are organized and what you have to do to get on the ballot. Then you have issues like gerrymandering that affect how the opposition party, to say nothing of 3rd parties, can get elected. The system is rigged by the party in power, which means you need a strong single contender to beat it. by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
I agree with you that there was no other choice for Britain and the US, but those Poles don't see it that way. This compares to the southerners that refuse to believe that the south was defeated, and continue to promote racist hatred of the north and blacks. They have had a resurgence under Trump. Sadly, almost any war I know of left some people angry with the results. In and Japan, while most people have embraced the result, there are factions that don't. For example the swastika waving boneheads in Germany. Lots of anger. by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024