Time For a Constitutional Convention?

[Skylar]

I seriously doubt it. The polls are showing strong public support for immigration reform and a majority of folks supporting an Obama EO on the topic if Congress won't act.

Question is....why kind of reform? I strongly support reform, which would close the anchor baby loophole, criminalize illegal entry and presence as felonies, and deliver severe punishments to anyone knowingly hiring illegal labor. I support Obama using Executive Order to send the US Army to the border at 5 foot intervals to secure the southern border if Congress won't act.

And by 'anchor babies', you mean natural born US citizens?

I mean the children of illegally present aliens who should not be entitled to citizenship, and for whom citizenship is merely a technical circumstance by which they and their parents continue to extort the American people.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

We do not want politicians and bureaucrats deciding who is or is not a citizen, who will or will not have his civil liberties. One is a citizen at birth, regardless the status of his parents, the Framers of the 14th Amendment were wise to remove the question from the political arena.

Different time..........different circumstances..............the rest of the world was right to change this............it is crazy to give citizenship to a new baby that has parents from abroad...............

OK.........your baby is a citizen now..............but our laws deport the parents..............take the baby or drop off at child services..................It's ridiculous................

Wong Kim Ark's family was already abroad. He was born in San Francisco. The courts found that he was a US citizen at birth. They didn't think the idea was crazy.

 

[eagle1462010]

Uniformity Clause of the constitution...........taxation equal across the nation, even though it has been staggered via income levels and justified that it is uniform via annual wages. Under this currently, through earned income credits and other credits, those that pay no federal taxes at all get refunds for thousands of dollars every year..............While I understand this, as they don't make much...........Paying no taxes at all should be the limit. Noting that this alone costs us about 200 BILLION PLUS A YEAR................that we have to borrow to pay.

What uniformity clause in the Constitution?

2. Rotten ACORN? There are many documented cases over time. Anyone who denies it, is just ignoring the problem. We have to show an i.d. for many things.........and to say needing a photo i.d. to vote would suppress voters is crazy.........I've been showing my i.d. at the polls for a very long time.............It doesn't bother anyone here. I believe in one vote per person.........but we have seen cases of one person voting multiple times as well. Showing an i.d. and making sure dead people don't vote not that of getting hit by a lighting strike unless you live under a rock.

If in person voter fraud is as prevalent as you claim, then it should be remarkably easy for you to find hundreds, if not thousands of cases of it.

Please show us.

So you can't cite the 'uniformity clause' then? Nor cite any significant number of cases of in-person voter fraud?

Then why would all citizens have to pay taxes? And why would we implement voter ID?

Have you ever heard of google................use it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Citizens do provide identification when they register to vote, and after that no further 'proof' of eligibility is required for citizens who remain active on the voter registration rolls. Voter 'fraud' by identity is virtually non-existent, where requiring registered, eligible voters to provide a specific type of ID manifests as an undue burden to the fundamental right to vote.

 

[Kosh]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Citizens do provide identification when they register to vote, and after that no further 'proof' of eligibility is required for citizens who remain active on the voter registration rolls. Voter 'fraud' by identity is virtually non-existent, where requiring registered, eligible voters to provide a specific type of ID manifests as an undue burden to the fundamental right to vote.

And the far left propaganda comes out using words they do not understand such as the word "rights"..

 

[Skylar]

Uniformity Clause of the constitution...........taxation equal across the nation, even though it has been staggered via income levels and justified that it is uniform via annual wages. Under this currently, through earned income credits and other credits, those that pay no federal taxes at all get refunds for thousands of dollars every year..............While I understand this, as they don't make much...........Paying no taxes at all should be the limit. Noting that this alone costs us about 200 BILLION PLUS A YEAR................that we have to borrow to pay.

What uniformity clause in the Constitution?

2. Rotten ACORN? There are many documented cases over time. Anyone who denies it, is just ignoring the problem. We have to show an i.d. for many things.........and to say needing a photo i.d. to vote would suppress voters is crazy.........I've been showing my i.d. at the polls for a very long time.............It doesn't bother anyone here. I believe in one vote per person.........but we have seen cases of one person voting multiple times as well. Showing an i.d. and making sure dead people don't vote not that of getting hit by a lighting strike unless you live under a rock.

If in person voter fraud is as prevalent as you claim, then it should be remarkably easy for you to find hundreds, if not thousands of cases of it.

Please show us.

So you can't cite the 'uniformity clause' then? Nor cite any significant number of cases of in-person voter fraud?

Then why would all citizens have to pay taxes? And why would we implement voter ID?

Have you ever heard of google................use it.

I have. The Uniformity clause that exists in the constitution doesn't say a thing about everyone having to be taxed. So can you show us the uniformity clause in the constitution that does?

 

[eagle1462010]

Uniformity Clause
...all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 1

 

[Skylar]

Uniformity Clause
...all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 1

And how does that mandate that everyone pay taxes?

 

[Jackson]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Why?

All citizens make use of the infrastructure and take advantage of the protections of the police and the military supplies for us.

The right to vote is one the most fragile rights we have. It should be protected. If a person does not have an id, it can be obtained at a voting place by bringing their birth certificate and their picture can be supplied for their card. It will be sent to them after they vote.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Forget about impeachment: If Obama issues an executive order in violation of existing immigration law, the public outcry may be sufficient to cause 2/3 of the States to call for a Constitutional Convention to limit his authority and propose other Amendments to reform the workings of the Federal Government. The next two years may be the only opportunity to reverse the destructive path our nation is following.

If a Constitutional Convention was to be called, what Amendments would you support?

indeed it is time

let me think about that

 

[Skylar]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Why?

All citizens make use of the infrastructure and take advantage of the protections of the police and the military supplies for us.

But not all citizens have the same means to contribute to said infrastructure or military. Why wouldn't means play a role in determining taxation given how wildly different the means of different citizens can be?

The right to vote is one the most fragile rights we have. It should be protected. If a person does not have an id, it can be obtained at a voting place by bringing their birth certificate and their picture can be supplied for their card. It will be sent to them after they vote.

[/quote]

But in person voter fraud is almost non-existent. Texas for example could find only 2 cases in the last 10 years.

And yet their voter ID laws could potentially disenfranchise 200,000. If the right to vote is so fragile, why make it more difficult? Why disenfrancise hundreds of thousands.....to prevent 2 cases of voter fraud in 10 years?

It simply makes no sense.

 

[Jackson]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Why?

All citizens make use of the infrastructure and take advantage of the protections of the police and the military supplies for us.

But not all citizens have the same means to contribute to said infrastructure or military. Why wouldn't means play a role in determining taxation given how wildly different the means of different citizens can be?

The right to vote is one the most fragile rights we have. It should be protected. If a person does not have an id, it can be obtained at a voting place by bringing their birth certificate and their picture can be supplied for their card. It will be sent to them after they vote.

But in person voter fraud is almost non-existent. Texas for example could find only 2 cases in the last 10 years.

And yet their voter ID laws could potentially disenfranchise 200,000. If the right to vote is so fragile, why make it more difficult? Why disenfrancise hundreds of thousands.....to prevent 2 cases of voter fraud in 10 years?

It simply makes no sense.[/QUOTE]

In taxation, it would be a sliding scale the way it is right now. The lower the income, the lower the percentage the citizen would pay for taxes.

There has been more cases of voter fraud than just a few.

 

[Skylar]

In taxation, it would be a sliding scale the way it is right now. The lower the income, the lower the percentage the citizen would pay for taxes.

And with tax breaks for say, home ownership, or children, many folks don't pay taxes at all. What's the issue?

There has been more cases of voter fraud than just a few.

In person voter fraud is the only type of voter fraud that Voter ID laws can touch. All other forms are completely irrelevant to voter ID laws. And Texas could find only 2 cases in the last 10 years.

Pennsylvania, when challenged to show how many cases of voter fraud its new voter ID law could have prevented......could name zero.

That's how rare it is.

 

[Jackson]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Why?

All citizens make use of the infrastructure and take advantage of the protections of the police and the military supplies for us.

But not all citizens have the same means to contribute to said infrastructure or military. Why wouldn't means play a role in determining taxation given how wildly different the means of different citizens can be?

The right to vote is one the most fragile rights we have. It should be protected. If a person does not have an id, it can be obtained at a voting place by bringing their birth certificate and their picture can be supplied for their card. It will be sent to them after they vote.

But in person voter fraud is almost non-existent. Texas for example could find only 2 cases in the last 10 years.

And yet their voter ID laws could potentially disenfranchise 200,000. If the right to vote is so fragile, why make it more difficult? Why disenfrancise hundreds of thousands.....to prevent 2 cases of voter fraud in 10 years?

It simply makes no sense.

[/QUOTE]

Wrong.. Just three fast links show over 100 convictions for voter fraud.

DEMOCRATS Arrested and or Convicted of Voter Fraud

Fraud Map Rotten Acorn

Texas has convicted 51 people of voter fraud, according the state's Attorney General Greg Abbott

Voter Fraud It s Real But Rare - ABC News

prosecutors convicted only 86 people for voter fraud

Read more:The GOP War on Voting Rolling Stone
Follow us:@rollingstone on Twitter

 

[CowboyTed]

All citizens should pay taxes. All citizens should show ID to vote.

Why?

Because everyone has an obligation to help pay for this gov't.

Because of voter fraud in the past.

So you think the problem with US elections is voter fraud afer only 1/3 of them show up to vote....

Mine would be:
Election reform: Alternative voting (PR STV), time to get more than two parties.
Campaign Reform: Public funding only with very small donations
Ban Super PACs, PACs..... Take money out of politics

Some serious control on Lobbying, full registration and recording of all meetings.

Finally I would put up:
Abortion, Divorce, Death Penalty, Stem Cell... and every other social law in the constitution... Get the politicains to stop running on social issues and get back to real government. America is the only conutry where you talk these issues into the ground. In other countries politicians run a mile from these issues, they are vote loosers(especially in PR Voting)..

Congressional voting by multiseat preference voting using single tranfer voting. That will stop gerrymandering.

 

[Skylar]

Wrong.. Just three fast links show over 100 convictions for voter fraud. Always Democrats, it seems...

DEMOCRATS Arrested and or Convicted of Voter Fraud

And which cases would voter ID have prevented. Specifically. Your first example is the forging of a petition. Which voter ID laws wouldn't have touched. The next two examples are voting in multiple precincts. Which voter ID laws wouldn't have touched. The next three examples are absentee balloting fraud. Which voter ID wouldn't have touched.

Voter fraud in general is quite rare. In-person voter fraud is the rarest of the rare...and the only kind voter ID would touch. Texas could only find 2 instances in the last 10 years. Pennsylvania couldn't find any.

Can you show us ANY instances of voter fraud in your list that voter ID laws would have prevented?

Texas has convicted 51 people of voter fraud, according the state's Attorney General Greg Abbott

And if you'd actually read the article rather than just the title, you'd have seen this:

Over the past decade Texas has convicted 51 people of voter fraud, according the state's Attorney General Greg Abbott. Only four of those cases were for voter impersonation, the only type of voter fraud that voter ID laws prevent.

Voter Fraud It s Real But Rare - ABC News

And for this we disenfranchise 200,000 people? 4 cases, with only two actual instances....in 10 years? With Pennsylvania unable to find ANY of either?

Read your own source. It makes my case for me.

prosecutors convicted only 86 people for voter fraud

Read more:The GOP War on Voting Rolling Stone
Follow us:@rollingstone on Twitter

Again read the article rather than just the title. The issue isn't voter fraud alone...its voter fraud that Voter ID could have prevented.

Out of the 300 million votes cast in that period, federal prosecutors convicted only 86 people for voter fraud – and many of the cases involved immigrants and former felons who were simply unaware of their ineligibility. A much-hyped investigation in Wisconsin, meanwhile, led to the prosecution of only .0007 percent of the local electorate for alleged voter fraud.

Read more: The GOP War on Voting Rolling Stone
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Immigrants and ineligible voters wouldn't have been stopped by Voter ID laws. These are problems with the registration system. The people in question shouldn't have been on the rolls to begin with. Voter ID laws wouldn't have prevented them from voting because they were actually on the voter rolls.

Are you noticing the pattern yet? Voter ID laws have virtually NO impact on voter fraud, as the only type of voter fraud that Voter ID laws could prevent almost never happens.

 

[CowboyTed]

What the hell would a constitutional convention achieve? As a matter of fact a CC would play right into the radical socialist left's agenda. We would end up with a system of law that nobody would recognize. Tampering with the greatest document in the world is always a bad idea.

This how it was really formed... It was written 200 years ago and might be a bit out of date now.

 

[Spare_change]

Balanced Budget Amendment

Term Limits

 

[regent]

Uniformity Clause
...all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 1

Meaning the taxes must be uniform geographically. Federal excise taxes must be the same in Maine as in Texas.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Balanced Budget Amendment

Term Limits

Nonsense.

A 'bba' is ridiculous and partisan, having no place in the Constitution.


And we already have term limits – they're called elections.

 

[American Horse]

What the hell would a constitutional convention achieve? As a matter of fact a CC would play right into the radical socialist left's agenda. We would end up with a system of law that nobody would recognize. Tampering with the greatest document in the world is always a bad idea.

It would be a convention of the states to amend the constitution, all amendments if which would be called by 3/4 of the state's legislatures and passed by all the states, not a re-drafting of a new constitution but an Artical V convention to keep the congress out of it to the greatest extent possible.

Of course they could (try) to preempt that with phony baloney amendments of their own to cut it off at the knees..