- 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: Dems do not want a Convention of States
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:54 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:54 pm to Old Hellen Yeller
a) under a constitutional convention, I personally think the Rs have way more to lose than the Ds. The big one is campaign finance reform. While both the Ds and the Rs are beneficiaries of the current system, the Rs get more of a benefit than the Ds right now with soft money. This issue is not popular with the states.
b) traditionally congress will do the amendment and push it to the states to avoid them calling for a convention. This keeps the status quo.
b) traditionally congress will do the amendment and push it to the states to avoid them calling for a convention. This keeps the status quo.
2
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:54 pm to MisterSenator
quote:
"T-L" word
And even reasonably liberal ones - 6 terms in the House, 2 terms in the Senate - for a total of 24 years - theoretically - would do more for the country than a balanced budget amendment, IMHO.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:55 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
b) traditionally congress will do the amendment and push it to the states to avoid them calling for a convention. This keeps the status quo.
I rarely say never, but write this down:
The U.S. Congress will NEVER propose either term limits or a balanced budget on its own - NEVER.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:56 pm to Choctaw
quote:
perhaps we'll find out
No, we will not. I'm pretty sure the last time we played "predictions" on this board you came up pretty short.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:57 pm to darkhorse
quote:
Dems do not want a Convention of States
Yup, dey skeeeered!
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:59 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
The U.S. Congress will NEVER propose either term limits or a balanced budget on its own - NEVER.
maybe but they really don't want a convention of the states to go through. I believe we saw a similar vibe in the 60s with the voting age thing.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 3:59 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
The U.S. Congress will NEVER propose either term limits or a balanced budget on its own - NEVER.
Yeah, absolutely not. This might actually be the only way we ever get this through.
Beautiful accountability implemented over Congress (and the rest of government) by the States designed by the framers for stuff exactly like these two impossibilities (T-L & B-B)
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:02 pm to MisterSenator
quote:
MisterSenator
WELL PUT SIR!
Checks to their non-balance
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:08 pm to Hawkeye95
34 states have to submit applications, and 38 would have to ratify it for the changes to become part of the constitution.
I don't even think we could get 38 stated to agree with a balanced budget amendment.
Also, it's not clear, but rescissions to applications may not be allowed. If that's the case, Michigan is the 34th state as of March 26.
It is a very delicate and deliberate process and we should all be concerned with it at the very least. It's basically surgery for our constitution.
I don't even think we could get 38 stated to agree with a balanced budget amendment.
Also, it's not clear, but rescissions to applications may not be allowed. If that's the case, Michigan is the 34th state as of March 26.
It is a very delicate and deliberate process and we should all be concerned with it at the very least. It's basically surgery for our constitution.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:08 pm to darkhorse
quote:
non-balance
precisely.
Unfortunately, from what I've read, the only reason Blue states are getting behind this (con-con) is to challenge the SC's ruling on campaign finance (money is free speech), which I personally am not a fan of changing. I think the Sc got it right on that one, so far (donation side). However, once a convention is called, who is to say the a balanced budget amendment or term limits legislation could not build speed once the con-con is called to order. This seldom happens (if ever?) so I would not venture to guess the possibility of more than one amendment being passed.
I think the states would be well served by all, even the politicians...
selling point: "if so and so can no longer run for that seat in DC, now i've got a shot finally!"
selling point: "if we ALL HAVE to have balanced budgets, why the *explicit* doesn't DC?!"
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:10 pm to dewster
quote:
Also, it's not clean, but rescissions to applications may not be allowed. If that's the case, Michigan is the 34th state as of March 26.
Either way, most state legislatures, including part-time, will be in session for the remainder of spring and some into summer, so it's not like there isn't time for this to build
Edit: Map/Calendar of State Legislative Sessions
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 4:12 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:25 pm to MisterSenator
Looks like Florida, Missouri, and Colorado are considering it now.
I like the idea of a balanced budget amendment. This could also go very badly, I imagine.
I like the idea of a balanced budget amendment. This could also go very badly, I imagine.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 4/9/14 at 4:32 pm to darkhorse
quote:
Dems do not want a Convention of States
Here is a senator's words
A Vermont lawmaker says a proposed constitutional convention of states is an attack on free speech and sets up the possibility for a runway convention.
“I see it as an attack on free speech,”
quote:
BTW.. it passed in vermont without him. quote:The Vermont Senate on March 20 voted in favor of an Article V constitutional convention
Since you didn't provide a link for this quote, do you think the unnamed senator is a democrat?
The reason I ask, reading your title it would imply that the democrats were opposed. The senator who made that quote was the senate minority leader- Joe Benning, R-Caledonia.
It was the Democrats that passed the bill, it was the Republicans who were opposed.
Vermont's opposition
Vermont's resolution
Posted on 4/9/14 at 6:00 pm to TigerintheNO
Bump cause I like this convention thread better
Posted on 4/10/14 at 12:54 am to MisterSenator
guess my last post /thread
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News