On December 6, U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and U.S. House member Ayanna Pressley (D-Ma.) introduced bills in each house of congress to provide that ex-felons may vote in all federal elections. Here is the text. The bills don’t have bill numbers yet.
Thanks to Democracy Docket for the link.
BLATANTLY UN-CONSTITUTIONAL BILL
1-2-1
17 AM-1
—
14 AM-2
—REQUIRE USA CON AMDT
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=140077
GALVESTON TX G MESS
WILL JR SAVE DEMOCRACY IN TX – VIA AN AMICUS BRIEF ???
Why is it unconstitutional? Article One says Congress can overrule state election laws for federal elections. Ron Paul four times introduced a ballot access bill that would have overruled state ballot access laws in federal elections.
@RW,
The Constitution defines who may vote in congressional elections. IIRC, Paul’s bills dealt with how candidates qualify. They were manner regulations.
Hugo Black’s kooky opinion in ‘Oregon v. Mitchell’ is not applicable.
@AZ,
The Census should permit US Citizens over the age of 18 to indicate if their right to vote is abridged, and if so, what is that basis of that abridgement.
JR —
SEE 1870 CENSUS PART –
BUT N-O-T REPEATED SINCE.
THUS -14-2 DEFACTO DEAD
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/07/politics/hunter-biden-criminal-case/index.html
H BIDEN — TAX INDICTMENT
TRUMP GOES EVEN MORE WILD ???
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/07/matt-gaetz-house-republicans-whisper-expelling-george-santos/71840867007/
EXPELL OR BE EXPELLED
—
MORE SOP VIOLATIONS -IN THE USA REGIME — ROTTING INTO A STONE AGE REGIME OF DEATH AND DESTRUCTION
MORE DONKEY CONVICTS THAN ELEPHANT CONVICTS ??? DUH
1-4 TIMES, PLACES, MANNER
N-O-T DEFINITION OF STATE ELECTOR
—
1-4 DUE TO OFTEN FAILURE OF STATES TO SEND REPS TO OLDE CONT CONGRESS IN 1775-1783 >>> PARALYSIS
>> LEAD TO USA GEN WASHINGTON BECOMING DE FACTO TYRANT- ESP IN 1780-1781
— TO DEFEAT THE KILLER/ENSLAVER BRITS (WITH MAJOR HELP FROM FRENCH).
1-4 OLDE USA ELECTION LAWS IN US CODE TITLE 2
Since slavery/servitude is legal for prisoners (13-1), an ex-prisoner’s right to vote should already be protected by 15-1.
What am I missing?
A.C.
14-2 CRIME LOOPHOLE
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2023/12/08/iowa-caucuses-vivek-ramaswamy-presidential-campaign-flirts-with-libertarian-party-ticket/71850797007/
RAMASWAMY MACHINATION — LP IOWA
There should be no ex felons. The penalty for felonies should be death, and it should be imposed upon sentencing.
Lots of gibberish and nonsense above. I agree with CP Fan, except for the asterisk. I disagree with the asterisk. I feel strongly that there should be an I there instead. I think Max Cult Member also makes the best points.
If they are paying federal taxes, they should be able to vote.
AGAIN – HOW MANY CONVICTS DIE TO FAKE EVIDENCE ???–
ESP PLANTED FAKE EVIDENCE BY COPS / PROSECUTORS
ESP BLACKS IN EX-SLAVE STATES — REMOVE THE UPPITY N FROM LOCAL POLITICS.
How many regular people die, or are afraid to leave their homes, due to revolving door “justice”?
Foreign corporations pay federal taxes.
@AZ
14-2 says that denying or abridging the right to vote to citizens that participate in crime does not affect apportionment. It implies that it’s legal to deny the right to vote to criminals, whether or not they are jailed.
OK
Why would AZ want criminals on the streets to victimize and terrorize more citizens?
Where is the comment from CP Fan? Asterisks don’t help, apparently.
1238 TYPO
AGAIN – HOW MANY CONVICTS DUE TO FAKE EVIDENCE ???–
@Max,
In Texas, voting in both a Democratic and Republican primary is a felony. How would you cause the death to occur?
@WZ,
There are no federal elections. There are State elections to elect members of the federal Congress.
If persons who pay a poll tax are permitted to vote, should those who don’t be denied that permission?
Jim Riley,
This is the first time I commented in this string. This wouldn’t be an issue, as there would be no party primaries (and if there were, they wouldn’t be the government’s business).
Given current technology, I think bullet to the head would be effective for most felonies. In the future, felons might be microwaved, electroshocked with something like a taser, etc. A traditional hanging by the neck until dead might be appropriate for the most severe and infamous crimes.
WMCT asks good questions above.
Jim Riley didn’t ask me, but yes, those who don’t pay poll tax should be denied the vote. Very few people should be allowed to vote, and no one should ever be required to.
I LOVE TO EAT MY OWN SHIT
P-A-T
Sick!
24-1 AMDT NO POLL TAX FOR USA OFFICER ELECTIONS
— UNIFORM ***POSITIVE*** ELECTOR DEFINITION IN ALL PARTS OF THE USA — ALL ELECTIONS —
USA CITIZEN / 18 PLUS YEARS OLDE ON ELECTION DAYS / BE REGISTERED BY 28 DAYS BEFORE ELECTION DAYS. PERIOD.
NO MENTAL / CRIMINAL / RACE / COLOR / SEX / TAX / ETC ***NEGATIVE*** STUFF.
UNIFORM TO HAVE 4-4 REPUBLICAN FORMS OF GOVT [IE MAJORITY RULE] IN ALL PARTS OF USA
The USSR also had a constitution. Much like the US constitution, it received much more lip service than adherence. It became completely irrelevant when the union was dissolved, which could also happen to the US. If dissolving the union isn’t the quickest way to do it, that is one of many amendments which should be repealed.
States are sovereign, not the union, and should determine voting criteria. Within States, it should be left up to localities. Exclusions from voting rights both do and should exist in various States. The ones that have been done away with over time should be restored and added to.
Republican form of government does NOT mean majority rule. Bolshevik does.
AZ says mental patients should be allowed to vote. Speaking for himself of course.
I wouldn’t let it anywhere near a voting booth or hall.
“Foreign corporations pay federal taxes.”
Yes. Corporations that pay taxes, even foreign ones, should be allowed to make direct political contributions. That gives them more than enough political power, without giving them actual votes, which would be problematical. How many votes should a corporation get?
Also, limits on the amounts of direct political contributions that a person may make should be abolished. IMO, they are unconstitutional, anyway. This should give those who pay more taxes than others more appropriate political leverage.
Federalist — Republican Form of Government – Majority Rule 20 Aug 2011
Federalist, 1787-1788 — Left page number from The Federalist edited by Jacob E. Cooke (1961) — (Number-Paragraph)
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federali.txt
emphasis added
57 10-2 By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
60 10-11 If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.
61 10-12 By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression.
61 10-13 From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
62 10-14 A Republic, by which I mean a Government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
62 10-15 The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
63 10-20 The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.
—-
SCOTUS BRAIN DEAD IGNORANT ABOUT 4-4 RFG ON TOP OF THE MINUS 666 IQ TROLL MORONS ON BAN
COOKE EDITION MAY BE ON INTERNET IF COPYRIGHT HAS EXPIRED.
—
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
“If persons who pay a poll tax are permitted to vote, should those who don’t be denied that permission?”
Should those who do pay taxes be barred from voting?
“The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter.”
This is one of the major reasons that we have a federal system, with sovereignty divided between the federal and the state government.
It is vitally important under this form that the delegation of power flow from the lower levels to the higher ones. State and municipal elections must be completely autonomous, and the central power must not be allowed to choose any officials of the constituent entities, which sometimes happens in countries that claim to have a federal system.
How many votes should a corporation get? The only logical conclusion from “only taxpayers votes and all taxpayers vote” is that votes should be proportioned to amount of taxes paid by each taxpayer. Corporate share based elections already do this. Each shareholder can vote the number of shares he/she/it holds or holds proxy for.
LOL. Troll moron AZ quotes one of many opinions at the time of the American revolution, but a representative one in that it argues against precisely his prior claim that Republican form of government and pure democracy are essentially the same.
Walter Ziobro at 649 is correct. The most government power should be devolved to the most local level possible, and most of all outside of government, to patriarchs, churches, businesses, etc.
Some who pay taxes should be barred from voting. Even Walter Ziobro agrees. He doesn’t want corporations voting. If governments were properly limited, there would be little incentive to give much to political campaigns, since the winners would not control all that much.
Paying taxes – property taxes especially – should be one of the prerequisites for voting, but far from the only one.
Should ex-felons also have their 2nd Amendment rights restored?
They should get their gun rights one bullet at a time.
I also agree with the other CP Fan, whose comment was unfortunately memory holed.
Please don’t. One his more than enough.
ALSO MORE RFG SENTENCES IN 1787-1788 FEDERALIST —
CAN ANY TROLL MORON BE USEFUL AND FIND ONE ???
You’re the only one here, so you can answer that, or not. Apparently pointing out that there’s far more to read is not allowed because only AZ can call people troll moron and other such names but not ok for the goose as for the gander. May as well live under ingsoc. Disjointed conversation, how pleasant. Like any petty timpot. But then waste of time regardless.
How about this. Useful conversation can’t happen like this. So you can only get meaning less snippets, because actual effort is wasted. Which it is regardless. Nobody cares.
NOOOOO BODY CARES ABOUT WHAT THE BAN TROLL MORONS OF MANY FAKE NAMES POST.
THEIR POSTS NEVER NOTE STUFF LIKE —
MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDERS
UNEQUAL PARTISAN OFFICE BALLOT ACCESS LAWS
PARTISAN HACK EXECS/JUDICS
SOP VIOLATIONS
AND ANY REMEDIES.
AZ is the resident troll moron and we all know that.
Of course. Even he knows that . Like if someone doesn’t obsess on his bugaboos it makes them a troll or a moron. As if.
Ironically, still no proof that anyone here besides AZ uses multiple fake names. He tells on himself.
Everything has been covered many times of course.
Minority rule gerrymanders: better than majority rule gerrymanders. The downside of at large or multiple member districts have likewise been beaten to death . Local rule with single district not good enough for some. Oh well.
Unequal ballot access laws – suggestions made there.
Partisan : useful information for voters who are not political junkies . Proof that partisan elections are better provided multiple times.
Every AZ bugaboo addressed to death. His idea of solutions would just make things worse. Why has been explained to death. Alternatives have been offered.
So on top of everything else he’s obviously lying. Memory fades with age, of course.
Besides, offering remedies til you’re blue in the face does not make them any sort of closer to real world implementation. It’s just useless repetition . Like what AZ does. Just different opinions. Equally not realistic, because not in the interests of vastly more powerful powers that be and vested interests.
Useless repetition to the same cranks begets nothing. Waste of time.
AZ thinks he speaks for others? What a hoot. Or actually he is talking about himself would be closer to truth.
The Max Plan is a solution. It’s been explained many times.
Yes, but even Max has more questions than answers about the Max Plan. Like the AZ plan, it’s not any closer to reality from being repeated a thousand or a million times on an obscure web sight to the same tiny audience. It’s not even that discernably closer to a real step by step plan. Plans require steps from here to there and realistic courses of action which make each step possible. Thus
AZ plan:
Post the same dreck to the same website 50-1000 times a day until quite literally blue in the face. Rinse, lather, repeat. Call people names, act superior, scream, use obscure jargon, condescend, don’t answer logical questions, don’t ever learn anything, don’t leave open the possibility, obsess, lots of fake news links
???
Profit? How? AZ plan no closer to reality than on iteration 1.
Max plan :
Might be better if implemented, but no closer to being implemented from repetitive repetition. Not much being learned because going around in the same circles over and over needlessly. Occasional good questions, but few solid answers. More importantly, the here to there plan is what’s lacking.
Give the Max plan 100,000 more dogmatic repetitions and it’s nothing but a mirror image AZ plan. Both completely utter wastes of time irrelevant to the real world.
Max plan needs dialectic structural testing, even as end state theory, but the least bad known venue is practically useless due to signal to noise ratio far too unfavorable . A thousand iterations might yield the benefit two should have. Way too inefficient, with no clear benefit.
Max time better spent with grandchildren, or with wife, or in Orthodox Church praying, or on target shooting range squeezing off many rounds, or a thousand other ways.
AZ is past making choices. Max does not want to spend next 20-30 years turning into next AZ mirror image version.
Max plan is now in hands of max spinoffs . Spin away. Happy spinning, spinners.
Max Plan should be tested on a small scale then go from there. AZ plan is just retarded.
Sounds right.