- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Thoughts on rushed constitutional convention in La? Looks like voters don’t really want it
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:33 am to 4cubbies
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:33 am to 4cubbies
1 percent of LA voters know what a constitutional convention is.
No one should be surprised that’s it is not seen as the top priority. That’s not the least bit surprising.
Is this from a liberal publication?
ETA: lol. Nola dot com
No one should be surprised that’s it is not seen as the top priority. That’s not the least bit surprising.
Is this from a liberal publication?
ETA: lol. Nola dot com
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 8:39 am
0
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:35 am to Suntiger
quote:
The only thing anyone brings up is Article 7. If that’s the goal, you don’t need a convention, especially since the “delegates” are the legislators.
Step 1. File a bill to say what you want in Article 7 and what you want in statute.
Step 2. Legislators debate it during the session. Public can testify and weigh in.
Step 3. Submit it to the people for a vote.
I find it funny that most people on here don’t like/trust “the government”. But when it comes to this issue, you want to give the politicians more power when most of these items were put in the Constitution to save them from politics in the first place. It’s ironic.
He's not wrong.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:35 am to 4cubbies
It’s not the fifty years. It’s about how you proceed now.
There’s something or someone behind this “priority”. I have my doubts that it’s about good government.
There’s something or someone behind this “priority”. I have my doubts that it’s about good government.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:40 am to Bard
quote:
Having a constitutional convention to remove the logjam of constitutional protections for various money has been talked about for over a decade, the only reason it seems "rushed" is because it's actually happening and that is getting news.
It seems rushed because it should not be a 2-week process concurrent with the end of session. There's also that whole restriction of public information bill that's still up in air. It appears that they want the entire constitution drafted and approved/sent to the ballot behind closed doors.
This quote is going to follow him for a while.
quote:
“Well I mean listen, that’s a great question. Do they? They elect us with full confidence that we’re going to go out there and solve those problems. When we make that decision, those decisions are public, it becomes the policy of the state,” he said.
“But all of the pre-decisions, you don’t go into the, I’ll give you a great example, when you go to a restaurant, do you go over there and watch the cook make everything he serves you? No, you just walk into a restaurant, those restaurants you that you think serve a great meal and you order that great meal. You don’t want to know how, what the cook put in there, where he got the ingredients, how many people were involved in cooking it, all you care about is a good meal. That’s what people of this state are looking for, they’re looking for elected officials to go out there and to solve their problems. This bill helps us to do that.”
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 10:36 am
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:47 am to VOR
quote:
good government
Oxymoron. At best, government is a "necessary evil." It is never "good."
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:50 am to tketaco
quote:
Louisiana will frick this up too. It'll be riddled with corruption.
Yep.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:51 am to TheFonz
quote:
One of the biggest issues is that the present constitution limits budget cuts to the education system and public safety. Everything else - in other words, the good ol' boys network and their pet projects - are protected.
Landry is a good ole boy though.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 8:52 am to Bard
quote:
Having a constitutional convention to remove the logjam of constitutional protections for various money has been talked about for over a decade,
A true constitutional convention maybe. It looks like Landry wants the state legislature to comprise the convention delegates and not allow other voices. That’s concerning.
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 8:54 am
Posted on 5/6/24 at 9:08 am to Diamondawg
quote:
Have you ever started a thread on here that had more upvotes than down? I suspect that's on purpose.
Are anonymous arrows important to you? I don’t put any stock in them. I don’t post here to get the approval of strangers.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 9:18 am to 4cubbies
quote:NO. But you can't argue incessantly if you start a thread that most people agree with. You do this on purpose.
Are anonymous arrows important to you? I don’t put any stock in them. I don’t post here to get the approval of strangers.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 9:33 am to Diamondawg
quote:
You do this on purpose.
Do what?
ETA: wait, are you saying I should only start controversial threads? I kind of thought this was controversial.
But it’s an election year and all anyone wants to discuss is Trump and Biden.
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 9:36 am
Posted on 5/6/24 at 10:21 am to FreddieMac
To me, we are not going far enough. Yes, removing some constitutional financial protections will help. Especially with a huge fiscal cliff coming.
But we need to do so much more. What we need to do is take the entire constiution, light it on fire, and start over. Completely over, blank slate start over.
We need to COMPLETELY redefine the role of state government, how it operates, how it collects revenue, etc, and how it relates to local government.
As others have stated, what they want to do now does not need a convention. Just pass an amendment that strikes out a bunch of other amendments, and put that on the ballot. That can be done in session.
But what we need is a whole new constitution that comletely reshapes state government, work on that and put it on the 2026 fall ballot (with all the congressional mid-terms). Then have it take effect so that 2027 state elections are under the new system.
But we need to do so much more. What we need to do is take the entire constiution, light it on fire, and start over. Completely over, blank slate start over.
We need to COMPLETELY redefine the role of state government, how it operates, how it collects revenue, etc, and how it relates to local government.
As others have stated, what they want to do now does not need a convention. Just pass an amendment that strikes out a bunch of other amendments, and put that on the ballot. That can be done in session.
But what we need is a whole new constitution that comletely reshapes state government, work on that and put it on the 2026 fall ballot (with all the congressional mid-terms). Then have it take effect so that 2027 state elections are under the new system.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 10:22 am to 4cubbies
quote:
A true constitutional convention maybe. It looks like Landry wants the state legislature to comprise the convention delegates and not allow other voices. That’s concerning.
I've often wondered about how someone qualifies to go to a constitutional convention. It's one of the few reservations I have for the intended convention for the US Constitution (that and the rules are whatever those attendees agree they are).
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 11:13 am
Posted on 5/6/24 at 11:28 am to Diamondawg
quote:
Have you ever started a thread on here that had more upvotes than down? I suspect that's on purpose.
4cubbies is sort of the jjdoc of the left - you just want to downvote his posts even if you agree with his point.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 12:06 pm to 4cubbies
i didnt get polled
Posted on 5/6/24 at 12:53 pm to Bard
quote:
I've often wondered about how someone qualifies to go to a constitutional convention.
Well, I found something absolutely shocking:
quote:
Boysie Bollinger and Lane Grigsby, two major donors to Landry’s campaign and other Republican candidates and causes, are also among the governor’s choices.
Gov. Landry picks delegates for constitutional convention
Posted on 5/6/24 at 12:57 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Boysie Bollinger and Lane Grigsby, two major donors to Landry’s campaign and other Republican candidates and causes, are also among the governor’s choices.
He did also pick the BR mayor and the head of the Dem party.
Posted on 5/6/24 at 12:58 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
You think two weeks is an appropriate time frame to draft and debate a new state constitution?
That’s my issue with it. The current constitution absolutely must be replaced.
I don’t like shoehorning it into the last two weeks of the legislative session. Just smacks of rubber stamping a pre-written document. I don’t trust the legislature, administration, or LA’s special interest community enough for that.
Is there some legal reason that it even needs to be done during session? Why not a separate constitutional convention?
Posted on 5/6/24 at 1:00 pm to 4cubbies
Double post
This post was edited on 5/6/24 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 5/6/24 at 1:03 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
He did also pick the BR mayor and the head of the Dem party.
Yes. They were elected to the positions that qualified them to be selected though, unlike the donors (who bought them).
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News