SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The U.S. Constitution has 27 amendments; each was proposed by Congress and ratified by the states.
However, the Constitution sets forth another procedure, never before used, for amending the Constitution. At the request of two thirds of the states, a constitutional convention would be held, at which amendments could be proposed. Any proposals would become part of the Constitution if three fourths of the states ratified them, either at state conventions or in the state legislatures.
Currently, 27 of the needed 34 states have petitioned Congress for a constitutional convention, for the ostensible purpose of writing a balanced-budget amendment (BBA). However, the convention might propose other changes in addition or instead of a BBA—even a total rewrite of the Constitution—if 38 states agreed, the changes would become law.
In November, legislators from 30 states met in Salt Lake City to discuss the matter.
- Forbes article from 2014 (mirror)
- John Birch Society (has a map)
- utahpolicy.com
- Deseret News
- Yellowhammer News
- The Universe—Brigham Young University
- San Francisco Chronicle
- KSTU-TV
- The Columbian
- Washington Post blog about historical attempts at constitutional conventions
- The Spokesman-Review
(Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Friday December 11 2015, @09:15AM
That was eradicated long time ago, only vestigial non-functional remains are to be seen. Very much like the appendix, the male boobs/nipples, wisdom teeth and the coccis.
You want proof you say? Look no further than the Trump social phenomenon and tell me what meaning "common sense" has? Common with what?
And the Tea Party hardliners before?
And the "house prices never go down" and mortgage backed bonds before them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 11 2015, @09:54AM
You want proof you say? Look no further than the Trump social phenomenon and tell me what meaning "common sense" has? Common with what? And the Tea Party hardliners before? And the "house prices never go down" and mortgage backed bonds before them?
I suppose your peculiar ideological slant emphasizes your argument by presenting you as an implicit fourth example, but it also indicates a blindness to rhetoric and to possible solutions. Wouldn't you think it peculiar to instead make the argument by rattling off foibles of the Roman Catholic church. And it weakens your argument. After all, general arguments are best supported by general evidence, second-best being a variety of specific evidence.
Similarly, if we should discuss solutions, one might conclude from your example, that this is all the problem of Trump voters, Tea Party hardliners, and a few financial instruments.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 11 2015, @11:28AM
It seems like you suggest both of us share quite a small amount of sense in common with the other. In which case your assertion above may act as another example.
discuss solutions to the problem of the lack of common sense? Far from my mind to suggest that what I presented are anything but some examples which demonstrate the existence of the problem and in no way a proposed solution; heck, I'm not even saying the examples describe completely the problem.
Coming back to where this started (i.e. your wish of "How about we grow some common sense") - our exchange shows that the solution to "growing some common sense" may be easier to say than do: lately the "commonality" of the sense is in a terrible weak state (while the "sense" part seems very inflamed).
As such:
Naaah... who am I kidding? It won't happen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford