SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Daily Northwestern reports
The Illinois Senate voted 38-18 on [November 16] to override Gov. Bruce Rauner's veto of an automatic voter registration bill.
The bill [...] would automatically register voters who are seeking a new or updated license, or who are seeking other services from state departments such as Human Services or Healthcare and Family Services.
[...]The only two things a citizen should need to vote is being 18 years old and a citizen.
[...]The bill received bipartisan support when it passed through the House by a vote of 86-30 and the Senate with a vote of 42-16.
[...]To fully override Rauner's veto, the Illinois House will also have to vote to override, but it will not back in session until Nov. 29.
More information on Automatic Voter Registration can be found here.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by art guerrilla on Sunday November 20 2016, @02:52PM
heh, i'll go you one better: let's bring back the constitution, and NOT have standing armies ! !!
(nor sitting ones, either)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21 2016, @05:01AM
Note that the Constitution provided for a standing navy, but not a standing army. Part of that is down to the limited utility of a navy for oppressing your own people, and part of it is that, in case of a legitimate, and therefore urgent, need for war, you can't spin up a navy as quickly or effectively as you can an army. As the army has grown more mechanized, there's a legitimate argument that it's no longer practical to fight a war starting with the militia and building an army -- how long does it take from purchase order to first shipment of tanks, before you can even start training crews? The ideal system would be to provide for a reasonable stockpile of materiel and training cadre to bootstrap a real army with, but not the army itself. However, it's difficult to imagine a way to legally distinguish these alternatives and provide an effective limit.
However, I'm a big believer in air power, especially as a potent deterrent, as in, "We don't have an army, so if you invade us or our allies, we'll skip right past 'shooting back at your grunts' and go to 'bombing the shit out of your capital'." Considering that, I'd favor a constitutional amendment providing for a standing air force analogous to the provisions for a navy, and take our chances with no standing army.
Perhaps if we were still in the Cold War I'd feel differently, and argue for trying to maintain control of a stockpile/cadre system; right now there's no threat that remotely justifies an actual standing army, and the ills of an uncontrolled military-industrial complex are far too obvious to disregard, so I'm not inclined to take chances.