I think Eddie has misunderstood something that someone has written here. Perhaps that someone was me. Eddie claims that other members of this list have said that Jim Elwell has a valid point about mandated metric conversion being unconstitutional. That's not correct. I have not read anything in the discussion on this list in which anyone has said that. Now I believe i did say that Jim had a valid point on a different but related issue. I believe I may have said that Jim had a valid point when he said that, because there are other people (besides Jim himself) who believe mandated metrication is unconstitutional, that when Congress passes such mandating legislation there will be many legal actions taken in the courts to try to overturn the legislation. Eddie, don't you agree there really are some metric opponents who would turn to the courts to try to prevent metrication if Congress passed such a law? I think Congress should pass the legislation anyway. But, if there really might be massive laws suits aganst it, there might be some other actions that should be taken (in addition to the metric legislation) to prevent the legal action against it (or at least make sure that metric proponents win the court battles). Is this point important or minor? I'm not sure. But it is a "valid point" and Jim Elwell raised it. Regards, Bill Hooper > From: eddie lechat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [USMA:13116] Re: Pulling Together (was Jim Elwell on wrong list) > > Elwell claims that Constitution prohibits > fixing the metric system as our standard. > > And several people here say, "Hm, Well, you know, > maybe Elwell has a valid point." > > This troubles me.
