Mike S wrote:
"We should get our old rules up to date. I propose we work to re-pass as many
of our existing rules as we can, and after one year all old rules which have
not been re-passed will automatically expire."
Don writes: This is the best policy - the policy of bringing an old rule up
for
Just getting 2/3 (i.e. 2:1) majorities to propose U.S. or State constitutional
amendments has proven difficult enough.
Most major reform amendments have come about only due to some major crisis.
Such as - the 12th Amdt after the chaos of the 1800 election, the 13th, 14th
and 15th Amdts due to t
Regarding a system where a support/oppose ratio of 5:1 (for example) would be
used for all decisions.
DEMOREP:
"I also note that most current laws have been passed by minority rule
gerrymander regimes. Would such laws now need to get a 5 to 1 vote to
repeal them ?"
Donald:
No - the
be paying the
increase of income tax should not be voting on the issue.
And, anyone who does not pay taxes should not have any say as to how
these taxes are to be spent. The people who pay the taxes are best
qualified as to how tax money should be spent.
These two quotes of DEMOREP are c
DEMOREP1 wrote:
-snip-
>Supermajorities permit, by definition, minority rule vetoes and can
>lead to a major crisis.
-snip-
I agree that supermajority requirements privilege the status quo.
I wouldn't want such a requirement to be placed on most decisions.
But there are situa
Currently there is around 30 percent indirect minority rule in all state
legislatures and in the U.S. House of Representatives . (Each district
winner gets an average of around 60 percent. A bare majority of the district
winners make/stop laws. Thus around 60 x 1/2 = around 30).
Getting a major
