Like a fresh wind coming down from Alaska – the state he represented as a U.S. Senator from 1969 – 1981, Mike Gravel is determined to start a debate about the fundamentals of democracy in his quest for the Democratic Party’s nomination for President.
People who heard his address before the Democratic National Committee a few weeks ago and his brief statements during the first debate between the Democratic aspirants last month may be getting the idea that this is no ordinary dark horse politician. (see: http://www.gravel2008.us)
For over a decade, given the failures of elected politicians, Mike Gravel has been engaged in some extraordinary research and consultations with leading constitutional law experts about the need to enact another check to the faltering checks and balances – namely, the National Initiative for Democracy, a proposed law that empowers the people as lawmakers.
Before you roll your eyes over what you feel is an unworkable utopian scheme, go to http://nationalinitiative.us to read the detailed constitutional justification for the sovereign right of the people to directly alter their government and make laws.
Among other legal scholars, Yale Law School Professor, Akhil Reed Amar and legal author, Alan Hirsch, have argued that the Constitution recognizes the inalienable right of the American people to amend the Constitution directly through majority vote. What the Constitution does not do is spell out the procedures for such a sovereign right.
The right of the People to alter their government flows from the Declaration of Independence, the declared views of the founding fathers and the framers of the Constitution, its Preamble (“We the People of the United States….do ordain and establish this Constitution,”), Article VII and other provisions, including the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
Very briefly, The Democracy Amendment asserts the Power of People to make laws, creates an Electoral Trust to administer the national elections, limits the use of money in National Initiative elections to natural persons (e.g. not corporations), and enacts the National Initiative through a federal ballot, when fifty percent of the voters (equal to half of the votes cast in the most recent presidential election) deliver their votes in its favor. Voting can be through traditional and electronic modes.
The Democracy Statute establishes deliberative legislative procedures vital for lawmaking by the people, administered by the Electoral Trust, in an independent arm of the U.S. government.
Mike Gravel points out that the initiative authority to make laws now exists in 24 states and more than 200 local communities. However, the national initiative, which he envisions would have deliberate legislative procedures and would be generically independent of any curtailment by the “officialdom of government,” except a judicial finding of fraud.
With the National Initiative, the people acting as lawmakers, will be able to address healthcare, education, energy, taxes, the environment, transportation, the electoral college, the Iraq war, and other neglected, delayed or distorted priorities. Legal scholar, Alan Hirsch, believes “a more direct democracy could be an important means of promoting civic maturation.”
Of course these initiatives, if enacted, would still be subject to existing constitutional safeguards such as the First Amendment, equal protection, due process and the like.
No doubt, you may have many questions to be answered. If you are interested, the entire text of The Democracy Amendment and The Democracy Act are on both the above-mentioned websites.
Mr. Gravel’s political positions place him high on the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Cong. Dennis Kucinich will find that he is not alone during the forthcoming debates scheduled by the Democratic Party.
Don’t expect Mike Gravel to show up in the money-raising sweepstakes. For he really believes in a government of, by and for the People.
This proposal is not exactly a magnet for Fat cat money. No candidate for President from the two major parties has ever demonstrated such a detailed position regarding the sovereign power of People to amend the Constitution and make laws.
Will soundbite debates and horserace media interviews allow for such a public deliberation over the next year? Only if the People take their sovereignty seriously and take charge of the campaign trail with their pre-election, pre-primary participation in city, town and country throughout the country.
Over 2000 years ago, the ancient Roman lawyer and orator, Marcus Cicero, defined freedom with these enduring words: “Freedom is participation in power.” That could be the mantra for Mike Gravel’s 2008 Presidential campaign, whose phone number is (703) 516-4056.
The US’ greatest democrat (small d) speaks, let us heed him. As in 2004 when he urged Democrat (Capital D) to vote for Kucinich in the primaries he implores those who can to examine another democratic (small d) Democrat (capital D) candidate. No spoiler he, Nader truly wants what is fairest and most democratic for our country.
The notion of Constitutional Amendmant by referendum and the limiting of political influence to natural persons is one we should look at and support in our communities. Start with IRV (Ranked Choice Voting) and progress from there.
Keep on working for change.
I think ideally the idea of the National Initiative for Democracy is a good one. What concerns me about it is that we live in a less than ideal reality. This initiative, like democracy itself, requires an educated citizenry. Without that, initiatives which will be worded to mean the opposite of how that sound and intiatives which play on hysteria and ignorance will cause more harm than good. Maybe it should include testing on the issues at hand and on the initiative before a citizen can vote. Maybe we need a to work on getting to a place as a nation where such an initiative will be practical.
Jaded Prole,
Unfortunately, reality is what reality is. And it is very much less than ideal. If all the humans in this country were TRULY awake; were TRULY aware; were TRULY willing to ACT; were TRULY not dumbed-down by a t.v. and “shopping mentality”; were TRULY feeling powerful and not apathetic; and were TRULY immune to the media’s programming–I believe a KUCINICH/GRAVEL ticket would turn this into the great country it could and SHOULD be! So…How do we turn all of the above around?
Yes! Let the people make the laws!
Several years ago, California voters passed Proposition 187, which denied health care and schooling to illegal aliens, but the courts struck it down.
But sadly, the courts make their own decisions.
Yes! Let the people make the laws!
Georgia voters approved a measure whereby voters would identify themselves before being able to cast their vote, but the courts struck it down.
Dang, and it made so much sense too!
Yes! Let the people make the laws!
Arizona voters approved an “English Only inititive which would have saved the state hundreds of thousands of dollars, but the courts struck it down.
¡Permita que las personas hagan las leyes!
I’ll do ya one better!
How about “voter offsets” that places voting on a more even field? How about incentives to make voting more powerful and influential?
Let’s say you get one additional vote for each of the below qualifiying conditions:
* Honorably discharged Veteran (Duty, Honor, Country)
* Graduate Degree from Accredited University (Demonstrated ability to think)
* Owner of a business that provides jobs (Active participant in the economy)
* Being an activist for your political party (demonstrates a willingness to get involved)
And how about we limit some folks from voting? How about disqualifying any of the above from casting a vote:
* High School Dropouts (too stupid to vote)
* Convicted Criminals (proven bad choices)
* Welfare Recipients (dependent-centered thinking)
Now those kind of reforms might actually do some good!
Tongue in cheek, of course. We’d never in a zillion years make that be able to happen. Makes far too much sense!
Better yet, get rid of Congress and the President and have every state secede from the Union, and enforce only those laws that have been passed by the majority population of the state. Then California wouldn’t have to give a damn about the senator from Mississippi, or Clarence Thomas. Get rid of federal government and end war and massive corruption.
Mr. Nader is right to endorse this bold proposal by Michael Gravel. Gravel is a progressive on all three major fronts: domestic policy, foreign policy and (with this idea) electoral policy–like Kucinich–and unlike the other corporate-militarist Democrats running for president.
Nader’s endorsement matters, for he is a true progressive in Cindy Sheehan’s sense of our identity. The Democracy Initiative is the progressive equivalent of the Bush idea of the “sovereignty of the unitary executive.” That is, the Democracy Initiative advocates the sovereignty of the people.
That said, this proposal needs the equivalent of a peer review by key progressive electoral reform scholars. Mr. Nader counts as one. He championed the idea of a federalized corporate charter that requires employees to be on corporate boards of directors. He has total credibility. He also has an entire political platform which contains many of the standard, great ideas for progressive electoral policy.
However, Nader and his endorsement is not enough. I’d like to know what Kucinich thinks. And the Green Party people. We need other progressive scholars to critique and improve this proposal, for, upon reading the website referred to above, it is nearly a Gravel-only initiative.
Key progressive electoral scholars include Rob Richie from www.fairvote.org; Steven Hill author of 10 Steps to Repair American Democracy; Sanford Levinson, author of Our Undemocratic Constitution; Robert Dahl, author of How Democratic Is The US Constitution?; and Dan Lazare, author of Frozen Republic. (And there are several others.)
Initially, I can see obvious, big flaws in Gravel’s system. For example, the “Electoral Trust” that would administer proposals and elections is chosen by one person elected from each state using one-person-one-vote. So California with nearly 40 million and Wyoming with half a million each get one person on the Trust–just like the thoroughly unrepresentative US Senate. And there is no provision for placing differing political factions (through a party vote, like Israel or New Zealand or via multiseat districts) on the Electoral Trust. This is not proportional representation–a key progressive criteria for fair representation. And there are many other flaws.
Folks, the Nader endorsement of Gravel’s idea is important. But this won’t fly, as is, without a *thorough* critique and subsequent modification.
Take a look at other good ideas for changing our government. See the work in print by the authors and experts mentioned above. See http://www.initiativesamendment.org/ by Tony Simpson. See www.foavc.org — a group advocating for an Article V constitutional amendment.
Those who disparage the ability of the American people to do sensible things need to heed the facts: there have been precisely 233 state constitutional conventions in American history. (See John Dinan’s book on the subject.) That is a lot of national experience with the people governing themselves.
Boldness is precisely what we need. Bravo to Ralph Nader! And bravo to Michael Gravel!
Now . . . there is no substitute for an informed, progressive citizenry. That takes study. Let the study begin!
Once again Ralph Nader shows his un-American side. Clearly he reads stuff and seems to understand things. There is no place for his kind in this great country. AND, he’s Lebanese!
How about this:
1.) Every person can vote on every issue.
2.) A person can choose any willing person as their representative if this is unfeasible for them.
3.) They may change representation at any time, no need to wait for an election.
4.) No qualifications on who may represent.
5.) A representative can represent two people or 200 million, no limit on scale.
FD82 - Have you been living under a rock? Nader has done more for the people of this Country than you could ever hope to. Do a little research and then tell me why you think he in un-American.
“And he is Lebanese” Well FD shows his colors!
Just like we are forming a common opinion here, Mike Gravel’s Web Site should break down the issues and state his goals and reasoning.
The public and corporations can respond to how it will affect them. Everybody has input!
We can work it out!
Mike Gravel, keeps his ideas, problems and solutions at the top of the category in an ever changing solution to the problem. People can rate concepts and ideas and the most popular are represented and displayed just below Mike Gravel’s personal opinion of how he should handle it to please EVERYBODY!
Notice my “Echo Chamber” technique promoting MIKE GRAVEL!
But will he continue to please once he is in the White House?
Dear Nader4prez. It’s called irony. You know, a joke? I worship Ralph Nader. Sorry for misleading you. I can assure you that I have not been living under a rock. There is not a single issue upon which Mr. Nader and I disagree.
fd32: I laughed when I read it. Especially the part about his being Lebanese. Not only is he of Lebanese descent–he uses big words. Very unAmerican. “Deliberative.” “Constitutional.” “Extraordinary.” “Amendment.” “Electronic.” . . . Nader is a great, true progressive. It’s easy to tell. Motive. He wants to help people. To improve the country. To save the world. (Think: seatbelts and airbags in every car . . . how’d that happen?.)
Nader hindered automotive progress in this country for 20 years. He has a hatred for GM which unhinges him. The Corvair was safer than the VW Beetle, but Nader had nothing to say about that car. Nader started the tide of ridiculous law-suits. His intereference in the engineering of cars probably cost 50,000 lives.
Now he wants democracy? Not the republic which great minds put together. In a country where unions run the schools? and the average teacher can’t spell or write past the grade 9 level? and 25% of high school graduates can’t read their diploma?
Why not just let Homer Simpson make up the laws? Yeah, Nader wants to help people –the Nazis who step in the fix the disaster this idiotic idea will inflict.
the Nazis who step in to fix the disaster this idiotic idea will inflict.
Nader rocks he’s a hero. You guys make such a fuss about things that are obvious. Direct voting by the people is the most efficient system for making decisions, and addressing issues.
we do it all the time. here in switzerland. all you need is a certain number of signitures and you can force any issue to national referendum. budgets, government programs, whatever - we vote directly.
together we make better decisions in the long run.
it’s totally possible. feasible. and as a matter of efficiency - to everyone’s benefit. (read the wisdom of crowds - must!)
efficiency - doing more with less. it’s smart.
when are you going to take it to the next level.
we want some pax americana! like in vermont, but even better.
stop the military industrial complex - nobody wants to fight anymore.
we’ve got to direct resources to surviving - living. not killing.
i love america - and i’m not even american. freedom and the pursuit of happiness - awesome! but military campaigns for the benefit of corporations is the definition of fascism. and a fascist worm has creapt into the american system that the constitution demands be stricken. but it’s just hemp right? No. It’s your historical obligation as americans.
we all hang in the balance.
peace.
ps: you’re gonna need us helvetians to get to that other planet. we got mad skills.
“Among other legal scholars, Yale Law School Professor, Akhil Reed Amar and legal author, Alan Hirsch, have argued that the Constitution recognizes the inalienable right of the American people to amend the Constitution directly through majority vote. What the Constitution does not do is spell out the procedures for such a sovereign right.”
If it doesn’t spell out the procedures, I guess “We The People” will have to spell them out.
It’s time to storm Capitol Hill! The people of this country have been subjugated for far too long.
guymacher May 8th, 2007 7:57 pm
“Nader hindered automotive progress in this country for 20 years. He has a hatred for GM which unhinges him. The Corvair was safer than the VW Beetle, but Nader had nothing to say about that car.”
My older brother had a Corvair that caught fire. I had a VW Beetle that didn’t give me any heat in the winter once the heater boxes developed rust holes, but other than that, they were great little cars. In fact, I was one of the few who was able to drive through the blizard of “76″, and it happened to be a VW Beetle I was driving.
And remember one thing, guymacher, Ralph Nader was one of the first to help protect citizens against the greed of corporations who pushed dangerous items onto the market just to make money. It would have been impossible for him to keep up with all the corporate predators in this nation and around the globe.
This man saved more lives by blowing the whistle on corporate predators than anyone else in my lifetime.
Will it be lawful, under this initiative, for bible-and hellfire preachers and their congregations to propose initiatives?
Our current system made sense in a society where travel was by horse and it could take weeks or months to get from wherever home was to wherever the Congress was. In that world, it made sense to elect a representative to travel to the government and represent you.
With today’s modern communications, it makes no sense. Unless of course you are a politically connected SOB whom the lobbyists are plying with money so you represent them instead of the citizens.
My suggestions would to keep a two-house system. But one house is literaly the American people. People can participate as much as they want. They could participate in committees. Any bill trying to pass that people’s house is something that every American can vote for.
Then you keep something like the House, but make its selected by a proportional representation vote. Ie, if Greens are 5% of the people, they get about 20 seats. Maybe change the rules abit to have it act a bit more like the Senate where the minority can actually stop or slow down something (assuming the minority doesn’t act like Democrats and just roll over and play dead of course).
To the poster a few up from me … amazing how you can spot the Democrat in the room. If the Democrats had the balls to fight to protect and defend their voters, they’d have won in 2000 and 2004. They won Florida, but failed to fight to claim it. But they’d rather whine and bitch about Nader some 7 years on.
Ah, the last line (”by blowing the whistle on corporate predators”) explains the Democrat hatred for Nader. To the Democrats, corporate predators are someone to take to lunch and ask for a big bribe … uh donation, in exchange for promising to protect the corporate predators. If you doubt this, look at the 14 Dem Senators who just voted help kill a bill that would have allowed American citizens to buy lower priced drugs from overseas. The big pharma companies can import the same pills, the repackage them and sell them to you at a big profit. But its a federal crime for you to buy these pills for less than the legal-extortion prices charged by Big Pharma.
Ah, the Democratic party hard at work making the world safe for corporate predators. And if you think that’s new, just remember that Mr. Nader was fighting a Democratic administration and Congress back in the 60’s when he was fighting to get safer cars for all of us. Cue the Talking Heads saying “Same as it ever was, same as it ever was …”
To Earthian:
Yes! Regarding vocabulary-a few weeks ago shrub actually pronounced illustrative correctly.I swear as he did it you could see a passing gleam in his eyes that “yes I did it!”. Of course-one 4 syllable word every decade-makes up for daily incoherence.
The lost Check and Balance in the scheme of power that needs to be institutionalized is a limit of the Executive’s ability to communicate with the people. In fact, this needs to be institutionalized internationally.
The Founding Fathers, of course, never foresaw the implications of the mass media as an instrument for demagoguery. The media should not be used for propagandizing, for destroying rationale discourse as it is now being used.
The evening I saw Nader at Madison Square Garden (in 2004), I talked to random people on the floor, heard the comments from the guest speakers and performers, and that evening I felt as good about people as I possibly ever could. That is what Mr. Nader does time after time to the audience.
Hey freedomlover what do you think we have now? Habeas corpus has been wiped out, extraordinary renditions, torture, warrantless wiretapping, people with Arab sounding names kept off airplanes, fascists like John Ashcroft telling us to watch what we say and what we do.
Personally I don’t think Americans can do much worse a job of running this country than the politicians who do what the corporations tell them to do.
PDFee, I don’t know you well enough to know how serious you are about this multiple vote idea. But if you’re really attached to it, I suggest another criteria: add another vote for every life you’ve saved, and then Ralph Nader gets millions of votes.
As for your other ideas, straight out of the Republican handbook for disenfranchising poor voters. But maybe from your other remarks that’s OK with you. So by your standards, it helps to be born rich, like George, since he wouldn’t have had an education or succeeded in business on his own. And does he get credit for drinking his way through the National Guard instead of serving in Vietnam? Ah, the benefits of inherited wealth!
I didn’t see anything in this National Initiative for Direct Democracy saying the courts could not rule on the constitutionality of voter passed intiative laws. And it seems to me that if the voters make mistakes, they can correct them.
Im signing on to this. And Ralph Nader is one of my very few heroes. I voted for him in 2000 and 2004 and have not regretted it ever. I wiil do it again if the Democrats insist on putting up one of their corporate clowns for President.
www.acesfoundation.multiply.com, do pls check this out as we would like to have Ralph Nader be part of this project which is to raise awareness for arab children in war torn areas, and he is the ideal candidate to promote this project global project at the White House.
email: Margaret Cooper
mediacorp1@yahoo.com
www.acesfoundation.multiply.com, do pls check this out as we would like to have Ralph Nader be part of this project which is to raise awareness for arab children in war torn areas, and he is the ideal candidate to promote this global project at the White House.
email : Margaret Cooper
mediacorp1@yahoo.com
Kathy O:
I was complete tongue-in-cheek about the multiple voting, but dead-on serious about the radical courts overturning the vote of the people.
It pretty much throws out the “by the people” thing when a court will impose it’s ideological bent in direct opposition to what the citizenry have voted on, doesn’t it?
I was most disturbed about the overturning of the voter ID initiatives. The distillation of the vote by allowing anonomous and unconfirmed casting of ballots is appalling. Any politician who supports it is not on my ID only ballot.
It is Time for US - the People - to take the Power back. Here is a closely Related Idea - in fact, the next step after the Gravel Initiative. Check it out at http://www.beyondplutocracy.com/
FD32 - just wanted to apologize, sometimes it isn’t clear on these things who is and who isn’t being sarcastic.
Nader for President 2008
“¡Permita que las personas hagan las leyes!”
PDFee, the correct idiom for that usage is “la gente”, not “las personas”.
We the People, collectively too stupid to be trusted to vote? I hate that mindset, it has screwed us over since this country was formed.
An informed voter base will ensure more discerning voters.
After we impeach the Prez and end the war…
* First issue up for vote: end of media monopolies!
* Second issue: campaign reform!
* Third issue: EDUCATION, as in how about diverting those mis-spent war funds toward better education for grades K-12, so kids just turning 18 have a freaking clue about the political process, and then FREE higher education for everyone, even felons (the latter because our legal system is corrupt and has disproportionately incarcerated disenfranchised segments of our society)!
*Issue Four: Accessible, affordable medical care for all Americans, including dental and vision! How are we American going to achieve any progress, if we are all stupid and unwell?
About Nader. Anyone “dissing” Nader is seriously misinformed. He’s a true American hero. Beautiful, inside and out. Yes, it’s true, I have a mad, 33 year crush on Nader, ever since I was 8, and read an article about him, where he not only talked about battling the destructive auto industry entities, he said he bought his clothes at thrift stores- and in his pic he was oh-so stylin’, vintage mod, in his ancient suit and sensible shoes. I was like, “See ya’ later, Donny Osmond- I’m in LOVE”.
Over the years, Nader has continued to impress me, and though he’s pretty much kept out of mainstream media, with his work and positive influence, he forever manages to continue perpetuating what’s good.
If only more guys would try to be as cool as Nader… this world would ROCK!
FREEDOMLOVER, it’s convenient to attack straw men, isn’t it?
The plan laid out by the National Initiative movement to amend the constitution and the proposal for how people would legislate laws is not one where in a heated moment people could quickly pass a law or amendment. A deliberative and somewhat lengthy process is described that would ensure that people have to seriously reflect upon the proposed law.
So your scenarios where the people in a moment of fear suddenly pass a scary law isn’t realistic. In fact, it seems far more likely that the small group of privileged people in government have the ability to rapidly pass scary laws. Indeed, Congress has done so on many occasions. PATRIOT Act sound familiar? The procedures described in the National Initiative do not allow such a rapid passage of law as can be achieved by a Congress ready to take advantage of a scared people.
Furthermore, even if the people do something stupid, who are you to say that they don’t have the power to do as they see fit? According to the Constitution itself, the people are the sovereigns. Any true lover of freedom would recognize this as so.
The deliberative collective decision of the people themselves is far more likely to be “correct” than the decision of a few so-called representatives who are funded by profit driven corporations.
If power is dangerous to “give” to the people, then it is FAR more dangerous to give it to a few people or to one man.
mcdevins: one year of Spanish in 1975 did not make me fluent. Lo siento mucho. I hope you did at least glean some of the point of my commentary being in Spanish!
Any commentary about the courts overturning the will of the people??
Any salient discussion about letting the people make the laws doesn’t always work??
Any desire to further the conversation instead of nit-picking my idiomatically incorrect Spanish?
PDFee, Glad to hear that was tongue-in-cheek, I suspected you had been reading Nevil Shute and agreeing with him. I like him as a storyteller, but his politics were atavistic. As for the voter ID laws, the courts threw them out because they imposed essentially a poll tax on the poor. If the IDs were paid for by the government, the courts might not have objected. They did have some desired Republican effects, however. They threw the precinct workers into utter confusion, and many qualified voters were unfairly denied the right to vote. According to Greg Palast, about 3 million nationwide. And he does his homework.
freedomlover, I know perfectly well where John Ashcroft is now. A teacher at Pat Robertson’s Regents University and a lobbyist. And I know all about amending the Constitution. This initiative amends the Constitution so we the people can pass our own laws. That doesn’t make every law we pass a constitutional amendment. And there’s no way the Patriot Act could have been passed so fast without anyone except Ralph Nader EVEN READING IT if the voters were doing the passing. Sometime down the road we’ll have people like Hillary saying “If I’d known what was in it I wouldn’t have voted for it”.
Wake up, we’ve lost our country. We need to take it back. What’s your solution??
freedomlover, the initiative is a constitutional amendment which will allow registered voters to vote on voter created laws by the initiative process, not to create a stream of constitutional amendnments. Our Congress has been coopted by corporate money, and this is the only realistic way I can see to circumvent that. Read all of this initiative carefully, not just seven words. If we pass this, we can take back our country from the corporations.
We also have a citizen advocate who is also a very good lawyer and if he’s for it, I’m not afraid to try it. I admit I was leery until I read his article. I’m not a lawyer, and I’m very suspicious about the devil in the details, but I trust Ralph Nader completely.
By the way, the majority of Americans are more reasonable and thoughtful than you give them credit for being. They don’t want to exterminate homosexuals, drop nuclear bombs on anyone; they do support raising the minimum wage, universal health care, funding public education and social security and favor political solutions over rushing off to war. Why shouldn’t they get these things they want? Because that’s not what the corporations want. So you tell me who’s running this country. nd if the corporations decided they wanted to exterminate homosexuals, how long do you think it would take Congress to pass such a law so ordering it?
freedomlover, your solutions aren’t solutions, just criticisms. The solution to Bush having stolen the election is to change election laws so they can’t be stolen. the solution to the “looming” social security crisis is for congress to stop emptying the coffers into the general budget and take off the cap, let all income pay a social security tax. The Iraqi people want us out, they keep telling us we are why there is so much killing. Their parliament just passed a resolution telling us to leave - our MSM is ignoring that, as is Bush. Not on his agenda. These problems have solutions, but they’re being ignored by the MSM and Congress because these solutions aren’t on the corporate agenda. So, we need to take matters into our own hands. Does that scare you? Or is it just not on your agenda?
To PDFee,
Since your sarcastic posts reveal you to be someone who believes that illegal aliens should be allowed to vote and receive (free) public health care and (free) public education even though they are not citizens, have no ID and don’t speak English, and since you also believe that high school dropouts, convicted criminals and welfare recipients should NOT be allowed to vote, I suppose it follows that under your system the only high school dropouts, convicted criminals and welfare recipients who would be allowed to vote in U.S. elections would be those who come here illegally from foreign countries. Nice.
If you think U.S. citizens are too stupid or venal to be allowed to vote on national initiatives because they have already demonstrated their willingness to restrict the rights and privileges of U.S. citizenship to actual citizens, you should just say so directly. If you have a vested interest (i.e. salary or other compensation) in extending the rights and privileges of citizenship to non-citizens, you should disclose that as well.
tell,
Thanks for those wise words from Switzerland! I confess, however, I don’t know what “helvetians” are.
Bob K:
Not sure how you misconstrued my missives; but a quick glance at any of my plethora of bombasts to this website will forever cement for you the knowlege that I am 100% opposed to illegal alien voting, health care and public education. My comments regarding specific voting rights are labeled as specifically tongue-in-cheek, although like all good sarcasm, there is a kernel of validity in them.
Left up to me, the illegal alien situation would be solved with a 90 day notice that all persons who are in this country illegally will be forcefully deported to their country of origin and placed at the back of the legal applicants. Harsh? Yes. Necessary? Yes. Will anyone on this website agree with me? No. But that’s the nice thing about opinions; Just like belly-buttons, we all have one.
Are we straight now?
And by “straight” I mean in understanding of each others stated positions, no sexual connotation implied or assumed.
Kathy O:
That’s the point of this story; “Let the people make the laws”, right? Well, in my stated cases, the people DID try to make the laws and they were overturned by a judicial branch with an ideological stance!
So how can we empower the people to MAKE laws when the COURTS have the audacity to overturn them?
I would WHOLEHEARTEDLY vote for a federal amendment that would REQUIRE the presentation and verification of voting identification. Yes, totally and completely. Citizens of this country should be the ones voting, not just a warm body that shows up. Get it? To NOT require voter ID is completely ludicrous in my mind. Anyone who would lower or oppose this standard does not understand the most basic concepts of democracy!
I also feel strongly that the left-wing, liberal, progressive types who oppose voter ID do so solely for self-serving purposes because of the propensity for illegal aliens and other neer-do-well groups to vote their ticket and issues. I welcome any explaination to the otherwise!
tell:
Thanks again. You Swiss have had no wars for 150 years though surrounded by warring nations, no WOD and rare drug problems, few illegal immigration and crime problems, the best education and healthcare, a healthy environment, no boom and bust economy and the highest per capita income in the world. All this without having any natural resources to speak of!!!
The Swiss are a shining example of the direct democracy that Nader and Gravel are talking about. A permanent solution to the fine mess we’re in. I hope you will continue to help us understand your system of government and allay the fears that some here have expressed.
I would like to know if you can propose laws and vote for them online.
Happy to explain, PDFee. I am completely opposed to any fraudulent voting. I have no objection to voter ID requirements, but it must not be in such a manner as to put undue restrictions on the ability to vote. Some elderly people do not even have a birth certificate. For others, in some states, it’s expensive to obtain one. The ID itself can cost $20 on top of other expenses. So for the poor, this amounts to a poll tax which disenfranchises voters. I would LOVE to hear your solution to these problems. Are you aware that US attorneys have vigorously investigated - under this present administration - cases of voting fraud and all over the country have only found evidence to prosecute about a dozen cases? I’m not suggesting it’s OK for even a dozen fraudulent votes out of the millions cast, but let’s look at the other side of the coin.
I’m sure you’ve heard about the 58,000 (documented, with a lawsuit won) Florida voters eliminated from the rolls for possibly being felons (3000 were found to be legally disqualified), and still not reinstated 2 years later. Or the Ohio debacle (shenanegans as the press affectionately referred to it), which, with the ballots now safely sequestered for a real hand recount, could overturn the 2004 election. What about the 3 million uncounted ballots? Does this bother you? Can you look in your heart and say you would feel the same way about it if these were from Republican districts instead of Democratic districts?
By the way, what’s neer-do-well group? Are you referring to lifestyles or to voter fraud?
PDFee, would you like to expound on your kernel of validity to your tongue-in-cheek suggestion on specific voter’s rights?
PDFee, you had me fooled. It sure sounded like sarcasm.
I have a different solution to corporate insourcing of low-wage replacement workers (illegal aliens). We fine and jail their criminal employers, and stop providing public benefits. If an employer claims “we didn’t know” our 3,000 non-English speaking workers on the factory floor were illegal, they should get the same consideration a motorist gets when he tells a highway patrol officer he “didn’t know” he was speeding. The employer fines will more than pay for the costs of enforcement.
With no jobs and no public benefits, the illegals will voluntarily return home (where they can live well on the U.S. dollars they’ve accumulated while here). We don’t need to deport anybody. Let them pay their own travel costs. They can drive across the border in daylight, and stay together as families.
On the subject of voter ID cards, leftists are opposed because many legitimate citizens who vote mostly democratic don’t have IDs, and/or would have difficulty getting IDs, and would therefor not be able to vote. People without IDs include the elderly who no longer drive, people in large cities who use mass transit, disabled people, shut ins, etc. These people already have difficulty getting to the polls to vote, and they would have the same difficulties getting a current photograph, filling out forms, using the Internet, etc, to get a voter ID.
Also, young families with kids, poor people with two or three jobs, and legal immigrants who speak English poorly, are other examples of people for whom it is difficult to get to the polls and vote, much less have the time and knowledge to obtain a new, special ID card.
College students, renters, military recruits — people without a steady, permanent address — already face hurdles to voter registration and voting. For them, a voter ID is one more hurdle.
Thats why Republicans love the idea of voter IDs. They know it will keep many democratic voters from voting. There are many better ways to ensure that non-citizens don’t vote in our elections, without tilting the results to the Republicans.
Gee Bob, re illegal aliens, you’re talking about the good old days (pre Republican) when employers had to confirm citizen status or be held responsible for illegally employing undocumented workers. How things have changed. Way back then we didn’t have an illegal alien problem because employers would be charged with breaking the law. They still are breaking the law, but not charged. Now why do you suppose that is? Wouldn’t have anything to do with cheap labor with no voice, would it?
Hey PDFee, just think, if we enforced that law against employers, no more illegals trying to vote (which apparently they aren’t anyway).
kathyodat,
Not sure what you’re getting at with “Now why do you suppose that is? Wouldn’t have anything to do with cheap labor with no voice, would it?”
But, the reason for the change in enforcement is the Bush admistration’s accomodation of big corporations (campaign donors). Not to mention Republican-lite Democrats in Congress who are on the same gravy train.
As Business Week reported last year, “For years, lax federal and state enforcement of existing laws has given employers virtual carte blanche to hire illegals. Just four notices of intent to fine employers of unauthorized workers were issued in 2004, down from 417 in 1999, according to the Government Accountability Office.”
Read an interesting story about low-wage replacement workers, a carpet factory in Georgia, and the U.S. citizens who are fighting back, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_13/b3977087.htm
And be sure to read the comments from readers at the end.
freedomlover, I’m not talking about the Clinton old days, Clinton’s a Republican in a Democratic jacket. I’m talking about BEFORE ronald Reagan.
Bob, we’re on the same page.
freedomlover,
You want one example of Clinton prosecuting employers of illegal aliens? See my post immediately above your question.
There were 417 such prosecutions in 1999 (under Clinton). That number fell to 4 in 2004 (under Bush).
freedomlover, in 1952 the Immigrationand Nationality Act made it illegal to hire illegal aliens. This has been unenforced to various degrees, most notoriously in the agricultural sector, but the Bush administration has a hands-off policy regarding any enforcement of any laws regarding employer behavior, as we all know, some of us to our serious detriment. It has been a crime for 55 years.
Bob, 417 prosecutions under Clinton in 1999? And 10 million illegal aliens at present. Probably not quite so many then, but still, he wasn’t going fullout on this either. Of course, Clinton was only pretending to be a Democrat. As are most of them.
Kathy, you’re right that Clinton was a Republican-lite Democrat who was beholden to big corporations. His administration probably could have prosecuted many more illegal employers. Remember, however, some of these corporations employ 5,000 to 10,000 illegals, so 417 prosecutions affects a significant number of people.
But here’s the important point: while many criminal employers may have escaped prosecution in 1999, the 417 who were prosecuted sent a message to all employers that there was a risk attached to breaking the law. When Bush came in he reduced the prosecutions to less than 1% of the number under Clinton, giving employers the green light.
I don’t have the numbers at my finger tips, but I believe there were only a few million low-wage replacement workers here illegally in 1999, and that number exploded to the current 12-20 million under Bush.
Of course, none of this means that a Democrat in the White House is the answer to the problem. As we know, some Democrats are more corporate-friendly on this issue than even Bush. Or, at least, that’s what they say in order to keep the corporate campaign donations rolling in.
I’ve written to Kucinich about his position that employer prosecutions should stop altogether, because they “haven’t worked,” according to him. In this presidential campaign season, we should all be pressuring the Democratic candidates to stop supporting corporate insourcing of low-wage replacement workers.
That’s Kucinich’s position? I’m horrified. Don’t pick on the illegal immigrants, go after the employers and end NAFTA which is ruining the lives of low income workers and farmers in Mexico and driving them north. The current laisse faire policy is abusing the illegal workers and depressing wages for everyone else. And no, if you only go after 1% of the employers, it won’t work. They can count beans and take the gamble.
Actually I’ve become convinced the Democrats are deaf in their left ears.
Sadly, here is Dennis Kucinich’s position, as stated on his website:
Do you support greater enforcement or stricter penalties in regards to current law that punishes employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants?
“No. Sanctions on employers of undocumented workers have failed.”
http://kucinich.us/issues/immigrant_rights.php
Here’s some people making the laws
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070513/D8P3I0JO0.html
Any guesses how long until it’s overturned???