- 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: What would you like to see from a potential Convention of the States?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:18 pm to DByrd2
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:18 pm to DByrd2
-Dissolve the CIA, NSA, and FBI
-Abolishment of federal income taxes
-Joint defense agreement where States must contribute to defense based off population and other standardized metrics
-All federal agencies abolished
-Fed Reserve will immediately stop increasing money supply
-Congressmen must live in their own States, not DC
-Term limits
-Start the ending of Social Security
-End birthright citizenship
-Immigrants illegal or legal permanently banned from entitlements of any kind(unless individual States grant them)
-All laws and regulations post 1900 repealed
-Prison for gross judicial misconduct and offenses against civil liberties
-Judges can be sued for negligent handling of violent criminals, by the families of those affected by the release of violent offenders
so so many more
-Abolishment of federal income taxes
-Joint defense agreement where States must contribute to defense based off population and other standardized metrics
-All federal agencies abolished
-Fed Reserve will immediately stop increasing money supply
-Congressmen must live in their own States, not DC
-Term limits
-Start the ending of Social Security
-End birthright citizenship
-Immigrants illegal or legal permanently banned from entitlements of any kind(unless individual States grant them)
-All laws and regulations post 1900 repealed
-Prison for gross judicial misconduct and offenses against civil liberties
-Judges can be sued for negligent handling of violent criminals, by the families of those affected by the release of violent offenders
so so many more
0
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:23 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
A federal law can be nullified by 2/3 of the states.
Id be in favor of any State being able to ignore any federal law or statute not directly involving immigration
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:45 pm to DByrd2
A disolvement of the federal gov't
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:46 pm to DByrd2
No more Super PACs or corporate campaign donations of any kind.
Posted on 2/14/24 at 1:52 pm to Bard
quote:
Revoke the 17th Amendment.
Help me better understand the reasoning behind this particular movement. Prior to the 17th Amendment Senators were selected by State Legislatures. State Legislatures are chosen by the people.
So why is the extra step between the people and the Senator at all necessary or desirable?
Posted on 2/14/24 at 5:50 pm to GoblinGuide
quote:
So why is the extra step between the people and the Senator at all necessary or desirable?
This is a great question. Unfortunately, the reason isn't a one-sentence answer. It's all around the founding fathers' goals of government being accountable to the people.
First, some background: The people, as individuals, were intended to be represented primarily in the House of Representatives (which incidentally is why it's called "the People's house"). Each state as a whole was formerly represented in the Federal government by Senators (thus, it was called the State's house). The idea was that the founding fathers didn't want a super strong federal government shoving laws down onto the states. Instead, each state would govern as is best for the people of that state.
The implications of this are many. For example, when senators were appointed by a state legislature, they weren't as beholden to lobbyists, big-money corporations, and large campaign donors because they didn't require their vote (nor campaign money). Yes, there was some politics and corruption, but not as much.
Secondly, if the federal government were to try to shove unpopular statutes down onto the states in a power grab, the senators representing the states would put a stop to that. For example, if the federal Dept of Education wanted to require Common Core education standards be taught, the senators would be pushed by the local state legislatures (whom appoints them and whom they represent) to put a stop to that, thus keeping those decisions at a state level. They would be reticent to vote for any laws that supersede local governance.
Thirdly, the population centers of each state have the most money and people with wealth. These areas also happen to be the most liberal. So, this drives the senator to pander to cities and liberal viewpoints disproportionally more than the more conservative rural areas due to the population density and ability to garner campaign donations from wealthy individuals. Think California, Illinois, and New York. Their senators do not represent the views of their rural areas at all.
That's just a few of the implications but I've typed enough. :)
This post was edited on 2/14/24 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 2/14/24 at 5:51 pm to DByrd2
I wouldn’t like to see one. There’s nothing wrong with the constitution we have already. The problem is people in power not following it
Posted on 2/14/24 at 7:18 pm to SlackMaster
quote:
SlackMaster
Well done, sir.
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News