What would be the proposals that would even have a chance to come out of the convention and then get approved by 3/4 of the states?
Congressional term limits might fly.
Ummm, maybe. But there are a lot of consequences of limiting terms that aren't all positive. So, that one might not even make it.
Agree. I've long been a proponent of repealing or modifying the 14th. That was my point about 'defining citizenship and immigration'. To do that functionally you'd have to edit/repeal the 14th.
Is that your “wish list’ or are those the things that you believe would have a chance of passing? Or both?
More of a wish list. I doubt any of them would make it out and get ratified in any form that would be close to what I'd like.
The ERA based on gender is out dated now. The ERA should just be a blanket statement that all US citizens shall have all the rights of any other US citizen. period. That way all sub-sets are covered and none are omitted.
Nooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our country is too diverse to make that an option (ever) imo.
what does diversity have to do with over weighting the rural vote? serious question....
Diversity in thought, diversity in demographics, diversity in lifestyles....I just think the historical significance of the Electoral College will continue to work for those of us not on the coast, not in the densest populated areas. I get the whole popular vote argument, but if all a candidate has to do is win just a few states to win overall, I think that alienates a lot of people. I don't think the current system over-weights an rural area/state, if anything, it under-weights the non-rural areas. I don't know what the parameters are for adding/subtracting a state's electoral number and am too lazy right now to even check. But, as it currently sits, it works enough for me.
"work for" or provide disproportionate power to?
Well, we’re talking about THREE electoral college votes here, so I’m hard pressed to come up with a scenario where that would ever make a difference.
Yes it does sound representative. It is there precisely to ensure that the president has broad approval across many states. The college is in part a firewall against a state or states corrupting their voting processes. So it is protecting the entire republic by limiting a state. That and originally the states needed representation from their Senators.
So you think it is fine that Wyoming citizens have 3.5 X the political power as a New Yorker? In aggregate 80% of the electorate lives in urban centers.
The advocacy for moving away from the electoral college is in the context of a constitutional convention (which despite my "got damn this would be fun comment" would a complete shit show).
This is an idiotic tact. We don't have federal elections; we have state elections. As such there is not real direct comparison from one voter to another voter across state lines.
Yes, because what was required to form the first iteration of a democratic republic will always be appropriate. "We always did it that way" is a 3rd grade argument.
So it is your contention that we basically dissolve the idea that America is a republic of states? That's pretty much the last vestige.
If it helps, Department of Ag is moving out of DC. Unknown reason as to why, but my wife and I think it is to be closer to (ya know) the Ag and Land Grants. Our initial guess is moving to Omaha, but nothing has been announced outside of the move in general (all this is according to the AgEcon people and my wife).
Did YOU just call ME obtuse? I am going to go sulk in the corner....
