Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Discussion Arising from OKC 2nd Amendment Rally
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mugsy" data-source="post: 2073029" data-attributes="member: 18914"><p>When I mentioned the ConCon I touched on it never having been done since the first one. That is a real problem since it would be a grey area -the precedent would seem to be that once called the States would decide on their own delegations' compositions but I can't say there is any established procedure. I think it is far more likely that if there ever was enough political pressure to really make a Convention a possibility then Congress would act rapidly to pass the amendment via the more common means and get it out to the States to defuse any such possibility.</p><p></p><p>To address your other question - the whole point of not having Senator's directly elected would be to strengthen the hand of States, as separate members of the pillars of Federalism, by giving them a voice. Right now each Congressional District has a representative of the People (House members) and each State has two representatives of the people at large (US Senators) and the States as organic entities have nothing. The States have been politically emasculated and, as a result, there is no longer an effective counter-balance to Federal encroachment on State sovereignty.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mugsy, post: 2073029, member: 18914"] When I mentioned the ConCon I touched on it never having been done since the first one. That is a real problem since it would be a grey area -the precedent would seem to be that once called the States would decide on their own delegations' compositions but I can't say there is any established procedure. I think it is far more likely that if there ever was enough political pressure to really make a Convention a possibility then Congress would act rapidly to pass the amendment via the more common means and get it out to the States to defuse any such possibility. To address your other question - the whole point of not having Senator's directly elected would be to strengthen the hand of States, as separate members of the pillars of Federalism, by giving them a voice. Right now each Congressional District has a representative of the People (House members) and each State has two representatives of the people at large (US Senators) and the States as organic entities have nothing. The States have been politically emasculated and, as a result, there is no longer an effective counter-balance to Federal encroachment on State sovereignty. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Discussion Arising from OKC 2nd Amendment Rally
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom