Ultimate power

[mundame]

While I am all for tax reform, I am far more interested in a remedy for that "bloated government" to mention.

Yes, you are right, that is certainly the central part of the problem.

[ConHog]

Missed that. But then you've eliminated my ability to correct the chief ill.

I might agree with you, but for purposes of this discussion I wanted to eliminate a few choices. For instance, didn't want someone posting repeal the 2nd, or repeal the 10th or some such. The 17th gets caught in that.

Makes the exercise more stimulating, or should. I see another poster just blatantly and proudly? Ignored the constraints of the argument, for what purpose I do not know.

[fj1200]

Then advocating for my ascendancy to benevolent dictator status is out then too?

[tailfins]

Then advocating for my ascendancy to benevolent dictator status is out then too?

You'll need to stage a new assault on Moncada Barracks to go down that path.

Tyr can be your sacrificial stooge:

[mundame]

Makes the exercise more stimulating, or should. I see another poster just blatantly and proudly? Ignored the constraints of the argument, for what purpose I do not know.

Heh-heh.


I guess I COULD let you be the boss.....................................





Naaaaaaah.

[mundame]

I want to know something I don't understand:

What is this idea about repealing the Second Amendment that has been floating around? I see headlines, but I don't know what that means. Is that pro-gun or anti-gun? What's up with that?

[ConHog]

Heh-heh.


I guess I COULD let you be the boss.....................................





Naaaaaaah.

It has nothing to do with being the boss and everything to do with netiquette when responding to a post that asks a question that sets certain parameters.

You follow no such netiquette and are proud of it, duly noted.

[ConHog]

I want to know something I don't understand:

What is this idea about repealing the Second Amendment that has been floating around? I see headlines, but I don't know what that means. Is that pro-gun or anti-gun? What's up with that?

wrong thread, go read my thread on repealing the second.

[mundame]

wrong thread, go read my thread on repealing the second.

Thanx, okay, if I can find it.

[tailfins]

Repeal the Income Tax.

Oh, wait, do I have to follow ConHog's rules about no repeals?

Oh, no, right, I don't.


Yeah, repeal the Income Tax, force the government to find some simple and more fair way to fund the bloated government, with financial participation of ALL, not just a few paying for the whole thing.

He made that specification so it doesn't become a trivial thread.

[Thunderknuckles]

I personlly would add a balanced budget amendment.

Good idea although some exceptions would need to be made for certain circumstances like going to war.

Line item veto, though won't help for at least 4 years - 3 days.

Can solve all of our legislative problems with an amendment that a bill can only address one issue...no more riders, no more hidden pork.

Both of those ideas are cut from the same cloth and I would support them.

As for me, I would add something about Presidential terms. I don't like the current system where once elected you basically have 100 days to get something done while the rest of your term is mostly about shoring up your election for a second term. I haven't fleshed it all out yet but maybe something like 1 term spanning 6-8 years then you're out.

[ConHog]

Good idea although some exceptions would need to be made for certain circumstances like going to war.



Both of those ideas are cut from the same cloth and I would support them.

As for me, I would add something about Presidential terms. I don't like the current system where once elected you basically have 100 days to get something done while the rest of your term is mostly about shoring up your election for a second term. I haven't fleshed it all out yet but maybe something like 1 term spanning 6-8 years then you're out.

That would likely entail repealing the 22nd unless you removed the one term limit in favor of keeping the current 2 term limit.

And I think maybe that could work. An 8 year term would probably piss enough people off that no one would win a 2nd term. No matter the POTUS

[gabosaurus]

Definitely line item veto. Plus a clause that any bill presented for a final vote by either chamber of Congress must list any "additions" (i.e. pork) clearly and for public view. So we could see which members added them and why.
Pork is favored by congressional delegates of both parties, in case you aren't aware.

[Thunderknuckles]

Definitely line item veto. Plus a clause that any bill presented for a final vote by either chamber of Congress must list any "additions" (i.e. pork) clearly and for public view. So we could see which members added them and why.
Pork is favored by congressional delegates of both parties, in case you aren't aware.

More than just the pork aspect, it's the action of purposely sabotaging a bill by adding an item you know the other side would never agree to that lends my support to the idea.

[Abbey Marie]

Good idea although some exceptions would need to be made for certain circumstances like going to war.



Both of those ideas are cut from the same cloth and I would support them.

As for me, I would add something about Presidential terms. I don't like the current system where once elected you basically have 100 days to get something done while the rest of your term is mostly about shoring up your election for a second term. I haven't fleshed it all out yet but maybe something like 1 term spanning 6-8 years then you're out.

OTOH, the need to somewhat behave in order to be re-elected, may be all that keeps some of these folks from going completely off the rails.