Author Topic: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?  (Read 1612 times)

Tamas

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 18915
  • we are not in Kansas anymore
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #30 on: August 13, 2018, 11:56:17 am »
Politics was a considerable part in deciding for me where to live. I wanted a country where the political situation is more stable and predictable.


So I have moved to the UK





crazy canuck

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 24704
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #31 on: August 13, 2018, 11:59:11 am »
Politics was a considerable part in deciding for me where to live. I wanted a country where the political situation is more stable and predictable.


So I have moved to the UK




 :lol:

Berkut

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19065
  • Getting ready to post on Languish
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #32 on: August 13, 2018, 12:16:29 pm »
The funny thing is, I actually think we rather desperately need a convention. The current constitution is dated and nearly unworkable.

The problem is that some of the things we would want to change are actually exactly the opposite of what those who are bleating for one want - the last thing we need is giving more representation to "states" rather than actual people, which appears to be what these dumbasses want (because they know they are a clear minority overall, but majorities in the total number of low population states).
“If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven’t been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #33 on: August 13, 2018, 12:28:41 pm »
How does that erase that fact? The fact that they were able to compromise through such contentious issues is what is hard to replicate. That is the very thing what makes it seem so miraculous today.

I don't think that compromise is what made the CC so surprising.  What made it surprising was how far-sighted they actually were.  Other than not foreseeing the breakup of their own (and the only) political party, they did pretty well at establishing a workable division of federal and state powers, and providing a workable system with checks and balances at the federal level.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #34 on: August 13, 2018, 12:31:53 pm »
The funny thing is, I actually think we rather desperately need a convention. The current constitution is dated and nearly unworkable.

The problem is that some of the things we would want to change are actually exactly the opposite of what those who are bleating for one want - the last thing we need is giving more representation to "states" rather than actual people, which appears to be what these dumbasses want (because they know they are a clear minority overall, but majorities in the total number of low population states).

I don't see anything "unworkable" about the current US constitution.  It needs some tweaks to reduce the influence of the parties (like giving the federal governments, not state legislatures, the power to regulate congressional district outlines, and forcing all the states to divide EC votes proportional to the popular vote in each state), but most of the current government failure is due to shitty politicians, not an unworkable constitution.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Valmy

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 46442
  • Champions du Monde
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #35 on: August 13, 2018, 12:34:04 pm »
Quote
Coburn cited the three-fourths barrier – three out of four states need to agree for any proposal made to become law – a firewall to concerns over “runaway”. “All it takes is 13 judiciary chairmen, in 13 states, to stop anything stupid that might come out of that,” Coburn said. “Nothing’s going to happen, I’ll stake my life on that.”

Can't they just change that rule if they have a Constitutional Convention?
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Valmy is practically french. :frog:

Honorary gay award from Martinus

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #36 on: August 13, 2018, 12:41:35 pm »
Quote
Coburn cited the three-fourths barrier – three out of four states need to agree for any proposal made to become law – a firewall to concerns over “runaway”. “All it takes is 13 judiciary chairmen, in 13 states, to stop anything stupid that might come out of that,” Coburn said. “Nothing’s going to happen, I’ll stake my life on that.”

Can't they just change that rule if they have a Constitutional Convention?

Of course they can.  The only CC we have had did just that.  The CC can make whatever changes to the Constitution they like, including changes to Article V.  Indeed, it is hard to imagine that such a convention would NOT change the ratification rules, since the current rules would pose a high barrier to the convention's own work.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Valmy

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 46442
  • Champions du Monde
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #37 on: August 13, 2018, 12:44:29 pm »
So Coburn is claiming that nothing bad will happen with his convention because of the rules in the Constitution we would be superseding? He may not have thought this through.
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Valmy is practically french. :frog:

Honorary gay award from Martinus

Oexmelin

  • Naked Mole Rat
  • ********
  • Posts: 3090
  • Commissaire-ordonnateur
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #38 on: August 13, 2018, 12:45:30 pm »
Other than not foreseeing the breakup of their own (and the only) political party

You've evoked that twice already, and I wonder what you base that reading on.
Que le grand cric me croque !

Valmy

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 46442
  • Champions du Monde
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #39 on: August 13, 2018, 12:47:47 pm »
There were no official parties in 1787, right? I mean there were factions. I thought they formed initially from the fight over ratification.
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Valmy is practically french. :frog:

Honorary gay award from Martinus

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #40 on: August 13, 2018, 12:48:51 pm »
So Coburn is claiming that nothing bad will happen with his convention because of the rules in the Constitution we would be superseding? He may not have thought this through.

Exactly.  And the moron actually says he would "stake his life" on that interpretation.  If the cost of him losing that bet were not so high...
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

crazy canuck

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 24704
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #41 on: August 13, 2018, 12:49:45 pm »
The funny thing is, I actually think we rather desperately need a convention. The current constitution is dated and nearly unworkable.

The problem is that some of the things we would want to change are actually exactly the opposite of what those who are bleating for one want - the last thing we need is giving more representation to "states" rather than actual people, which appears to be what these dumbasses want (because they know they are a clear minority overall, but majorities in the total number of low population states).

I don't see anything "unworkable" about the current US constitution.  It needs some tweaks to reduce the influence of the parties (like giving the federal governments, not state legislatures, the power to regulate congressional district outlines, and forcing all the states to divide EC votes proportional to the popular vote in each state), but most of the current government failure is due to shitty politicians, not an unworkable constitution.


I agree.  The US constitution is a remarkable document and a high water mark for the protection of individual liberty.  But assuming Berkut is correct and the US constitution should be redrafted to fix whatever he believes makes the US constitution "nearly unworkable", the drafters of such a document will have no better success than the original drafters in avoiding the possibility of citizens electing politicians who promise to appoint supreme court justices who will interpret a perfectly good constitution in ways that the drafters had not intended.  Rather in the current political climate the US is likely to end up with a document the original drafters would never have agreed to and which cuts out the need for the Supreme Court to interpret away pesky protections for individual rights in order to advantage corporate interests.

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #42 on: August 13, 2018, 12:52:29 pm »
You've evoked that twice already, and I wonder what you base that reading on.

On the fact that there is no mention of political parties or their roles, or any limitation of their powers (such as gerrymandering, the obvious outcome of a political spoils system), and especially on the fact that there is no assigned role for an opposition (unlike the unwritten constitution they had grown up with).  Why?  Do you disagree?  If so, on what basis?
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #43 on: August 13, 2018, 12:53:34 pm »
There were no official parties in 1787, right? I mean there were factions. I thought they formed initially from the fight over ratification.

Indeed.  But the split over ratification came after the convention had finished.  It did result in the Bill of Rights, though.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 19577
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: U.S. Constitutional Convention - nonsense or real option?
« Reply #44 on: August 13, 2018, 12:56:40 pm »
The funny thing is, I actually think we rather desperately need a convention. The current constitution is dated and nearly unworkable.

The problem is that some of the things we would want to change are actually exactly the opposite of what those who are bleating for one want - the last thing we need is giving more representation to "states" rather than actual people, which appears to be what these dumbasses want (because they know they are a clear minority overall, but majorities in the total number of low population states).

I don't see anything "unworkable" about the current US constitution.  It needs some tweaks to reduce the influence of the parties (like giving the federal governments, not state legislatures, the power to regulate congressional district outlines, and forcing all the states to divide EC votes proportional to the popular vote in each state), but most of the current government failure is due to shitty politicians, not an unworkable constitution.


I agree.  The US constitution is a remarkable document and a high water mark for the protection of individual liberty.  But assuming Berkut is correct and the US constitution should be redrafted to fix whatever he believes makes the US constitution "nearly unworkable", the drafters of such a document will have no better success than the original drafters in avoiding the possibility of citizens electing politicians who promise to appoint supreme court justices who will interpret a perfectly good constitution in ways that the drafters had not intended.  Rather in the current political climate the US is likely to end up with a document the original drafters would never have agreed to and which cuts out the need for the Supreme Court to interpret away pesky protections for individual rights in order to advantage corporate interests.

We are in agreement.  :hmm:

Not sure how to react to such a novel and unexpected development.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar