Proposed Amendments

[chuck kottke]

i'm not sure whether it's for primary or secondary school students, or both.

 

maybe i should. :awesome:

Go for it!;)

[eff-exx]

Lyvie "shite. when i said : please reflect your thoughts about this country, well and through. and be a good leader by repairing our mistakes. it wouldn't hurt to try. :)

i meant it for the leader of Malaysia. :\"

Thanks - that is very flattering, but that's also a very tall order to fill, especially for someone who is not from Malaysia! Perhaps you need a local leader, who leads by example, from the will of the people?

 

oh crap. i didn't make myself clear again.

 

rephrasing the sentence for the third time :

 

"To Mr Najib : Please reflect your thoughts about this country, well and through. and be a good leader by repairing our mistakes. it wouldn't hurt to try. :)"

-----

there was once a website talking about Malaysia and it's going ons, the reality of it. and the author got into trouble. :shifty:

 

i hope this country would change, but sometimes things don't work out the way we want it to be. :\

----

What about your country? What's Orwellian?

[chuck kottke]

Hmm.. well, I hope that author keeps a good pen name going!

Yes, here too - we do need some fundamental change in our system to root out the corruption - and add some checks and balances back to it.

I was hoping our President would do just that - be he has to deal with Congress: in part the inability to make real change because of them, in part because of the way Washington works, and his own campaign backers.. it will take citizen grass-roots pressure to change it - otherwise, nothing will be done about it.

Orwellian in the sense that anyone who tries to reform the system has had their life's activities rifled through, and any small things they may have done wrong magnified and twisted by TV political ads and media attacks, just to destroy their credibility in the public's eye, and detract from their more honest ideas and goals towards change. In Orwell's world, anyone who dared question the authority was immediately suspect, investigated, and destroyed by the all-powerful government-corporate entity (big brother). Here, large corporate interests, consolidated media interests, and investment tycoons have so much power over government and the major "news" outlets, it's very difficult to bring about real change, and to get government to work for the people once again.

So what I and others would like to see is a major movement coalescing from many grass-root groups to get the big money out of politics as much as is possible, and set up a better system of checks and balances. If it takes an amendment to act as a rallying point, or some other motivational speaker, it would be worth it.

[Buxus vahlii]

I'll just start my own country :smug:

[the_gloaming09]

I think the drinking age should be lowered and the driving age should be raised

[Buxus vahlii]

I can roll with that :)

[chuck kottke]

Oh sure - but then who would work at all the retail stores and fast-food joints, and how would they get there?:laugh3: (that would be pretty unpopular a move, considering the lack of mass transit in many places, and the mass rebellion of younger people that would cause.. hmm...)

Sure, if we all lived in France, it might work!! (maybe..)

[the_gloaming09]

yeah but isn't it true that most car accidents involve teen kids?

 

On of my friends has learned about the human brain and apparently at around 16-17 a persons brain isn't fully developed so he made the argument that they don't have the full judgement to drive.

 

Also with the ramped binge drinking, to which some kids do it probably because they are not old enough, it might lower the amount of people drinking at younger ages.

 

Of course none of this would be passed... just an idea.

[Buxus vahlii]

Oh sure - but then who would work at all the retail stores and fast-food joints, and how would they get there?:laugh3: (that would be pretty unpopular a move, considering the lack of mass transit in many places, and the mass rebellion of younger people that would cause.. hmm...)

Sure, if we all lived in France, it might work!! (maybe..)

 

Never thought about all the "teen jobs" but in this economy all of those jobs are now replaced by old people :(

[chuck kottke]

Since our Democracy in the U.S. is imperiled by big money more than ever, a call to all those who are willing to step up and defend our right to fair elections: http://action.citizen.org/t/10315/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=2190

[chuck kottke]

Our Core Values

 

For as off-base from our true center as the U.S. gets, the Declaration of Independence says a lot about our core values, and why we should be fully supportive of democratic uprising in the wider world (and incidentally while this is dated, if it were updated for today, the equality of the sexes should make it read Human where it says Man or Men.):

* We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - that to secure these rights Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence indeed will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the Objective evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide for their future security.

 

[chuck kottke]

Fair Elections are our right to equitable & just representation. Fair elections & fair candidate races for office, a necessary prerequisite for honest governance & protection of our natural rights, shall be protected and enhanced for ourselves and for our posterity.

When the choice is between fair elections and unlimited speech or press, the right to fair elections must take precedent, for all other rights derive their protection through equitably selected representation, forming the basis of our government, and thus fair elections (including fair candidate races) are essential for the protection of all essential rights.

 

[chuck kottke]

The funding of elections & the funding of candidate races for public office shall be done on an equitable basis, so that any candidate able to garner a determined number of signatures on a petition of intent to seek public office (no less than 1/10th of 1% of the eligible voters in a given house district, no less than 1/20th of 1% of a state's population for a senate seat, and no less than 1/500th of 1% of the nation's population for the presidency) shall have available sufficient funds equal to that of any other qualifying candidate seeking the same office in that term. Limits on donations in any sense (soft money, hard money, ad money) shall be limited to citizens, and the maximum donation amount per citizen per candidate shall be no more than 1/100th of the average income per real live citizen, as per the latest official census figures.

The Funding of elections shall be done on an Equitable basis. Explanation: What I am intending is to end the uneven funds available for voting precincts, which discourages voter turnout in poorer regions of the country. If one thing should be equal, it is our right to vote and our access to voting.

Candidate Equality, a level playing field. To some this sounds wrong in that it may appear that candidates who don't work as hard in getting funds & work to get support from donors then get the same in the end anyhow. Hence, one might assume lazy candidates can waltz in even though they don't deserve the opportunity to run. However, absent this, the candidate who gets the most funds from the biggest donors then buys the most ad time and often wins the election, and then does favors for those big donors. Setting the threshold for signatures high enough ensures that only serious candidates are able to get into the field & on the ballot. Those who garner backers more than the other candidates have the interest of real supporters who will then actually speak to other citizens feeling a part of that candidate's campaign, the more the merrier. So someone just taking the make-up money wouldn't necessarily then have an equal chance, since they haven't made as many connections with real people. But if it boils down to choice between a more honest candidate who better represents the will of the people and one who is not, then even if that better candidate is relatively less known to start off, the opportunity exists for equal evaluation by the voters, and in the end, the best fit can be chosen.

[chuck kottke]

What I am wondering is how to get the process rolling, since amendments require approval by Congress and then state legislatures, which like asking the gamblers to give up gambling. And what would seem a reasonable level for signatures required to get on the ballot? Is the current level alright, too few, too many?

How big a mass movement would it take to get the process changed, and equity in elections addressed in America?

[the_gloaming09]

just have a lot of money and lobby as many people in congress as you can

[chuck kottke]

just have a lot of money and lobby as many people in congress as you can

:laugh3: That's the horse race we're watching right now, all bets are on all horses to run away with the game, as we tumble off the cliff with them.

Ah, so that's it - wait for the next big crash (sometime soon), and then when everyone's broke, start a massive lobbying effort funded by everyone's pooled pennies?

[chuck kottke]

In the process of selecting representatives to our government, that process must yield individuals who, when elected, will represent all of their constituents on an equal basis, proceed with legislation that represents the will of the majority without trampling on the rights of the minority, uphold fairness, and promote justice in our nation, as well as the world.

[chuck kottke]

At present, that process has become corrupted by those with the money and insider influence to in essence purchase that which should never be for sale. It is that preferential treatment, resulting in appointments, lobbying positions, and the revolving door that exists in the seats of power, which has dimmed the lamp of liberty and tarnished our system of checks and balances to the point of becoming a mockery of the very essence for which it must stand.

When inequalities and corruption reach a level that is intolerable, it is our duty as citizens to right the wrong, and to chart a strait course to the ship of liberty & justice to which our nation belongs.

The means through which this corruption has weaken our resolve in now quite clear for all to see - it is the unchecked, unequal, and mass quantities of money flowing into the political process which has hollowed out the tree of democracy, it's decay leaving only the outer veneer of leaves and bark, neglecting the roots from which it sprang, and has so weakened the supporting structures as to make vulnerable the center of the nation, that which once stood as the solid beam of strength around which so massive a tree could grow and flourish.

So, I humbly submit to you an amendment for your consideration, and I am seeking any and all sincere input regarding remedies to the problems we now face.

[chuck kottke]

The usual path to amending the US Constitution is to first have states (or counties, then states) support the amendment by enacting similar legislation, until it becomes nation-wide, then propose an amendment at the Federal level, to which states then approve.

However, the problem we run into today is that the higher up you go, the more the moneyed interests block this reform, and with a supreme court tipped 5-4 in favor of preventing both campaign finance limits & balanced financing, progress often gets reversed after it becomes state law. That, and getting congress to approve limits is difficult, even though they all say they are tired of having to hawk for more money to get re-elected. The gamblers all know the game is doing them and everyone else harm, but they're too locked in to back away from the table.

So where do we go from here? Since if it isn't written in stone, the high court conservative justices seem unable to understand we have an inalienable right to fair elections, which inherently requires that the candidate race & elections process be on equitable terms for all qualifying candidates.

So, if we elected a progressive president, and there is a possible opening for a successful appointment & approval of a progressive court member to the Supreme Court, then we better the odds of getting real progress on this major issue.

If the popularity of an amendment were such that it became an undeniable force, then Congress would be hard pressed to block it, in essence there would be so much pressure to pass the amendment that any member voting no would face very poor re-election prospects and tons of bad press. Concurrent to this would be the necessity of applying great pressure through public support at the state level to pass this amendment, and while that may be a little less difficult, it is still a formidable task, and requires lengthy state-by-state efforts to approve the amendment.

But I cannot see any other way forward - either we remain mired in corruption, or free ourselves to promote the blessings of liberty.

The nature of progress is a spiral, but it's time for an upswing!;)

[chuck kottke]

So what I am interested in is to Make Elections Fair. Because to Make Trade Fair, one has to have honest governments that work for the will of the people and the rights of mankind.

Make Elections Fair

=

 

Make Trade Fair

[LoryABjerre]

Agreed. I think the government are very keen in producing more idiots each day with all the ridiculous laws taking place. Our education system for example, doesn't allow discussions on political issues in classrooms or you'll be thrown into jail under the Internal Security Act (ISA- google it if this term is not familiar to you), when the truth is that the textbooks used are filled with praises for the government and teachers are constantly being asked to promote all the 'good things' done by the government. So the way we were taught in school was in a democratic country like ours, Government = God, Oppositions = Useless Piece of Shit. Fucking hypocrite.

 

wow... the problem with everything in the world is to put less opportunity for people to power, but I'm talking about people who have money to fund corruptions. buy votes here and there.

Buch a farmer Texan have no education, nor much civility in politics should never have been president.

he throw a boomerang in his own country. it's a massacre in the towers.

 

I honestly think that people in America are completely closed to the world.

and have a lot of freedom for certain things and not enough for the others.

 

Standards in a country are important. and all countries must have a standard, for operate

Some countries have really good standard. for the conventions Canada, Denmark, Switzerland etc...

[LoryABjerre]

So what I am interested in is to Make Elections Fair. Because to Make Trade Fair, one has to have honest governments that work for the will of the people and the rights of mankind.

Make Elections Fair

=

 

Make Trade Fair

 

in America there are too many rich and dishonest and think of them more monay and business by electing the wrong people for their personal property. they do not think the poors :(

[chuck kottke]

in America there are too many rich and dishonest and think of them more monay and business by electing the wrong people for their personal property. they do not think the poors :(

Yes, you're right Lory, and it looks pretty bad at the present. But we also have a tradition of reinventing ourselves from time to time, and righting the wrongs and imbalances caused by the great disparities in wealth and opportunity. Economic downturns can be upturns in awareness and activism, if average citizens are given the facts and a central rallying point to press for reform. And I think the central issue is the need for getting the big money out of politics; social concerns only get addressed when government acts on our behalf as a whole, that is, when it represents the interests of the citizens as a whole, and enacts full measures to help those in need.

Some of those with great wealth see the world as a game, and simply want to "win" at it. Small minded they are, ultimately cheapening the world they live in. If instead they saw that when social needs are met, all citizens can be more productive, and the shared wealth of their society and world increases their wealth in that the world is a safer, more enjoyable place for them, as well as for every man, woman, and child on the planet. With fairness in the process of selecting representation, we all gain a government that acts as a promoter of well-being and harmony, protects the shared commons, and invests in long-term needs in society. It can put resources into the things that matter most, and throttle back on the resources being squandered. It can reward good business practices, and reduce bad business practices in the country, and by extension of trade policy, the world.

[chuck kottke]

Agreed. I think the government are very keen in producing more idiots each day with all the ridiculous laws taking place. Our education system for example, doesn't allow discussions on political issues in classrooms or you'll be thrown into jail under the Internal Security Act (ISA- google it if this term is not familiar to you), when the truth is that the textbooks used are filled with praises for the government and teachers are constantly being asked to promote all the 'good things' done by the government. So the way we were taught in school was in a democratic country like ours, Government = God, Oppositions = Useless Piece of Shit. Fucking hypocrite.

> Hm, sounds rather Orwellian to me too.. under The International Security Act?! I will definitely Google it! That's bad - having an education system designed to indoctrinate students into believing that the government is absolutely perfect, that is nuts. If it's called a democracy, then that should entail the right of anyone to run, and for all voices to be heard. Citizens can decide who they want in office - otherwise, it's not a democracy! Strange terms - sounds like newspeak to me..

Here, it's anyone can run, but the moneyed few behind the scenes decide what will be done, + or - a little bit. Those who pay for the ads buy the government they want, and we're left with less and less say in the process.

What little influence is left for the average citizens in the US is in interest groups that represent large blocks of the population, and they're constantly battling to save what little is left of representative government.

With the recent Supreme Court decision over the case of Citizens United vs. the Federal Elections Commission, given the conservative justices' decision, we now face a tidal-wave of campaign cash flooding virtually every sizable contest, with predictable results increasing the corruption level to new heights, and reducing our democracy to new lows.

How bad must it get before we act?

[Saffire]

That's bad - having an education system designed to indoctrinate students into believing that the government is absolutely perfect, that is nuts.

 

This is what the system currently teaches.

 

The meme is: "Sure, we've made mistakes in the past. But they are eventually corrected via the miracle of Democracy!", the implication being that liberalization of society and increased wealth is due to government, rather than hindered by it.

 

The free market is always portrayed as regressive, cruel, and unfair, while the evils of the State are glossed over as "ends justifying the means" (see: Civil War).

 

There are numerous examples of the US government ignoring the Bill of Rights, so more amendments wouldn't change anything. The purpose of Constitutions is to distract the public - it gives them the impression of some peaceful, voluntary logic backing State violence.