Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
NYrepublican

Forum Amendments to Article 1

Which of the following amendments to article 1 would you favor?  

17 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Which of the following amendments to article 1 would you favor?

    • Unicameral legislature with MMP voting system elected every 4 years during midterms
    • Universal adult suffrage
    • Remove age requirements, slavery related things
    • Term limits for Congress (16 years)
    • Voter initiative to call referendums to challenge congressional laws
    • Give President a line item veto
    • Have districts drawn by an independent commission
    • Have districts drawn using the split line method
    • Ranked choice voting in all federal elections
    • Forbid Governors from making temporary appointments to Congress; instead, require an automatic special election to be held within 6 months of a seat becoming vacant (unless an election is already scheduled to take place within 6 months)
    • Eliminate presidential vetoes replace with "sober second review"
    • Define copyright as 50 years MAX.
    • no changes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 07/12/2018 at 02:14 AM

Recommended Posts

poll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Forgot to make an option for no changes.

just added

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

poll

Please note that I am indifferent/undecided on the issue of term limits for members of the legislative branch and neither support nor oppose such an amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

changes need 2/3 approval of forum members in order to be ratified

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot's of these proposals go completely against the concept of federalism which is one of the greatest things about the system we currently have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jvikings1 said:

Lot's of these proposals go completely against the concept of federalism which is one of the greatest things about the system we currently have.

Federalism is a good thing, but in the U.S., in certain cases, it goes too far, and causes far too much disparity, legally, economically, and socially, in the nation than is beneficial (in fact, a lot of the time, it's detrimental).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patine said:

Federalism is a good thing, but in the U.S., in certain cases, it goes too far, and causes far too much disparity, legally, economically, and socially, in the nation than is beneficial (in fact, a lot of the time, it's detrimental).

Federalism has been greatly reduced in recent years.  The disregard for the 10th Amendment has been increasingly worrying.  Also, the point of federalism is for there to be disparity among the peoples.  People in KY are not the same as in IL.  The people in TX are not the same as CA.  Therefore, it gives them an opportunity to live and legislate differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

Federalism has been greatly reduced in recent years.  The disregard for the 10th Amendment has been increasingly worrying.  Also, the point of federalism is for there to be disparity among the peoples.  People in KY are not the same as in IL.  The people in TX are not the same as CA.  Therefore, it gives them an opportunity to live and legislate differently.

But in the form you propose, the disparity will become as bad as between the States of India, a nation where federalism went off the rails...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

current support for changes

1.Unicameral legislature with MMP as voting system elected every 4 years - 69%

2.Universal suffrage -  85%

3. Remove age requirements, slavery related things - 46%

4.Term limits for Congress (16 years) - 23%

5.Voter initiative to call referendums to challenge congressional laws - 69%

6.Give President a line item veto - 46%

7.Have districts drawn by an independent commission - 53%

8.Have districts drawn using the split line method - 23%

9.Ranked choice voting in all federal elections - 53%

10.Forbid Governors from making temporary appointments to Congress; instead, require an automatic special election to be held within 6 months of a seat becoming vacant (unless an election is already scheduled to take place within 6 months) - 53%

11.Eliminate presidential vetoes replace with "sober second review" - 23%

12.Define copyright as 50 years MAX . - 53%

13 votes cast right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it's fair that anything >50 passes and anything ≤ 50 does not pass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

Federalism has been greatly reduced in recent years.  The disregard for the 10th Amendment has been increasingly worrying.  Also, the point of federalism is for there to be disparity among the peoples.  People in KY are not the same as in IL.  The people in TX are not the same as CA.  Therefore, it gives them an opportunity to live and legislate differently.

Not to mention the Commerce Clause being ripped to shreds by the Wickard, Parrish, and Sebelius decisions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious. To the people who didn't vote for reduced copyright laws, why did you choose to do so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Curious. To the people who didn't vote for reduced copyright laws, why did you choose to do so?

Not an issue that should be legislated in the Constitution and putting it in Article I just felt weird, like it was being thrown in there for political purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Not an issue that should be legislated in the Constitution and putting it in Article I just felt weird, like it was being thrown in there for political purposes.

Copyright is in that article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

Copyright is in that article.

Yeah I know, I meant like legislating a specific cap on it felt weird and throwing it in there isn't something the Constitution should do. Its enumerating this power that the Congress can decide to use, sorry if I wasn't clear lol, I can see how it can be confusing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

Yeah I know, I meant like legislating a specific cap on it felt weird and throwing it in there isn't something the Constitution should do. Its enumerating this power that the Congress can decide to use, sorry if I wasn't clear lol, I can see how it can be confusing now.

Are you amending your vote to in favor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Not an issue that should be legislated in the Constitution and putting it in Article I just felt weird, like it was being thrown in there for political purposes.

Makes sense. Doesn't seem like an important enough issue to need to be in the Constitution. 

EDIT: Still support it tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

Are you amending your vote to in favor?

No, my argument still stands, I knew it was in there, I meant that again, a cap should not be applied. That's a weird thing to legislate in the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

No, my argument still stands, I knew it was in there, I meant that again, a cap should not be applied. That's a weird thing to legislate in the Constitution.

I think "reasonable times" should be defined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NYrepublican said:

I think "reasonable times" should be defined.

That's fair, I believe that is something that should be left to originalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

Federalism has been greatly reduced in recent years.  The disregard for the 10th Amendment has been increasingly worrying.  Also, the point of federalism is for there to be disparity among the peoples.  People in KY are not the same as in IL.  The people in TX are not the same as CA.  Therefore, it gives them an opportunity to live and legislate differently.

One of the issues is statements is that while rural or small town KY, IL, TX, CA differ from one another, the major cities of the US have more in common with each other than they do with the small towns and rural areas of their states. This is a primary reason why the Democratic party appeals to urbanites. Austin, TX, San Antonio, TX has more in common with Portland, OR, and Philadelphia, PA, than it does with Bastrop, TX. Big cities in heavily Red States trust the state government far less than the Federal Government, because they can't expect their own states to look to their interests. The same thing would happen if the Red state governments were appealing more to the cities and the Federal government opted to become overtly pro-Agrarian and Rural. People vote for what their interests are. 21st century large cities transcend the whole concept of state Federalism. I'd be okay with the states having more power on rural and small town issues and the ability to opt out of certain federal programs, if cities (especially in Red states) could be spared from state conservative laws that they don't find favorable. Perhaps the cities should be carved out of the states and operate as a kind of urban network state of it's own. 

But going back to "People in TX are not the same as CA," people in Southern Texas are not like people in West Texas, and not like People in East Texas, and not like people in the cities. People in North Texas are somewhat similar to West and East Texas. The TX politicians seem to be selected by small town and rural East, West, and North Texas. A strong turnout of the Cities and South Texas helps Democrats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

That's fair, I believe that is something that should be left to originalism.

The term "originalism" has really come to mean "let's just abdicate all responsibility or desire for Constitutional innovation, even where glaringly and crucially needed, and when the governmental and legal system and infrastructure suffer because of the self-imposed legal calicification, we can self-righteously congratulate ourselves."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NYrepublican said:

current support for changes

1.Unicameral legislature with MMP as voting system elected every 4 years - 69%

2.Universal suffrage -  85%

3. Remove age requirements, slavery related things - 46%

4.Term limits for Congress (16 years) - 23%

5.Voter initiative to call referendums to challenge congressional laws - 69%

6.Give President a line item veto - 46%

7.Have districts drawn by an independent commission - 53%

8.Have districts drawn using the split line method - 23%

9.Ranked choice voting in all federal elections - 53%

10.Forbid Governors from making temporary appointments to Congress; instead, require an automatic special election to be held within 6 months of a seat becoming vacant (unless an election is already scheduled to take place within 6 months) - 53%

11.Eliminate presidential vetoes replace with "sober second review" - 23%

12.Define copyright as 50 years MAX . - 53%

13 votes cast right now.

1. I might be more inclined to support if done on a state by state basis. But, that should be deiced by the state.

2. Does that mean kids and non-citizens can vote?  If so, that is a horrible idea.  Non-citizens shouldn't have a say in how a country is governed.

3. No point in eliminating age requirements considering nothing much would change.

4. Ballot box enforces term limits.

5. Direct democracy (especially nationally) is scary.

6. Sounds good on paper but wouldn't really work in today's partisan environment.

7. Up to states to decide how boundaries are drawn within them.

8. Don't know much about it but again up to the states.

9. Voting up to the states.

10. States need some way to ensure representation in case of a vacancy.  Method left up to the states.

11. Veto is essential for checks and balances.

12. Unnecessary within the Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

1. I might be more inclined to support if done on a state by state basis. But, that should be deiced by the state.

2. Does that mean kids and non-citizens can vote?  If so, that is a horrible idea.  Non-citizens shouldn't have a say in how a country is governed.

3. No point in eliminating age requirements considering nothing much would change.

4. Ballot box enforces term limits.

5. Direct democracy (especially nationally) is scary.

6. Sounds good on paper but wouldn't really work in today's partisan environment.

7. Up to states to decide how boundaries are drawn within them.

8. Don't know much about it but again up to the states.

9. Voting up to the states.

10. States need some way to ensure representation in case of a vacancy.  Method left up to the states.

11. Veto is essential for checks and balances.

12. Unnecessary within the Constitution.

1, 7, 8, 9, and 10 - State governments have reliably, serially, and ruthlessly abused these powers your defending at the expense of the nations', and even many of their own residents', interests. I would gladly see these "guaranteed powers" go, or at least be reduced.

2 - The term "universal suffrage," which is commonly used around the world, NEVER means children and non-citizens, just for reference.

5 - Why is this scary? Should citizens have to suffer from stupid laws opposed by a majority of the population but supported by government elites or special interest groups with no short-term legal recourse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×