Vote YES on these three amendments: 4, 5 and 6. Do you really have to know why, they are all no brainers. Just do it.
AARP endorsed 5 and 6 on September 16th. Here is the ballot summary:
5: Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.
6: Congressional districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.
5 comments:
I don't think these amendments will accomplish as much as the sponsors hope. With all of the data and software available to the Legislature, the Republican majority can still cleverly comply with the municipal and geographic boundaries to draw districts that favor the GOP. Just by drawing racial and language minority districts (as required under federal caselaw), the remaining areas are "bleached" (more Anglo) than before. Pack a few more white Democrats in with black Democrats, and the result is more Republican leaning districts left over.
All of the redistricting plans will be challenged in court regardless. Proving intent to favor or disfavor a political party will be difficult if not impossible. The only way to get rid of gerrymandering is to prohibit the entity that draws the districts from have any access to party registration or electoral history, except as necessary for complying with minority voting rights.
Since we are borrowing most of this money from the Saudi's and the Chinese don't be surprised if the Palmetto is reposessed by some Prince and used to park his Bentley's and Gold Plated Benz's or when the U Of M suddenly stands for the University of Mao.
Seriously this article is nothing but pro-stimulus propaganda no serious mention or consideration to the size of the "stimulus" or the debt being created (just a passing sentence or two).
Between Bushama bailouts and the "stimulus" we are digging a hole that might take a decade or two if not longer too climb out of.
I can't belive some like Gimspierre and G.O.D. are still blinded by partisanship, Obama has been in office two years and there are still 50K troops in Iraq and the War in Afghanistan is a alive and killing plenty.
FDR? You mean the guy who referred to Joseph Stalin as "Uncle Joe" and was surrounded by people who actually thought the Russian model was a good one. The man whose policies actually extended the depression or made it one, as opposed to a deep recession and possibly helped extend the damage to our economy to the present day.
Why don't you visit the Calvin Coolidge memorial if one exist, I'm sure no stimulus money went to that project.
In the mean time I'll start wearing a head dress and sandals and reading my Little Red Book just in case. Hopefully the US Government will use some of that stimulus money to hire one of those cheap Loan Modification attorneys and get us out of this mess.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
P. J. O'Rourke
In this case we should ad hookers to the equation.
I am shocked at Katy Sorenson's position on Amendment 4(Mia. Herald 9-26-10). For her to think we should start by getting the voting public involved by actually showing up at the polls and voting competent people in office is like waiting for the Marlins to finance their own their own stadium, it ain't going to happen. With a 20% turnout at the polls we can't seem to motivate enough people to voice their opinions. It's our own fault. Our only choice is pass Amendment 4 and go from there. Hell, we can't even get enough good people to run as Sorenson suggest so how do you think you would get them to turn out and vote. Go ahead and sit back on your laurels, we get what we deserve.
5 and 6 will give voters recourse to challenge boundaries. This is important. Vote "yes"
Katy Sorenson isn't always right. She is wrong about Amendment 4 for instance. She also gave Katie Edwards a campaign donation.
Post a Comment