Text 27470, 139 rader
Skriven 2007-02-25 19:57:21 av Ed Hulett (1:123/789.0)
     Kommentar till en text av VERN HUMPHREY (1:123/140)
Ärende: Presidential race
=========================
VERN HUMPHREY -> ED HULETT wrote:
 VH>>> The answer was, an amendment cannot violate itself.

 EH>> I knew that, but I wanted you to say it.

 VH> Are you happy, now? :-)

 VH>>> No it doesn't!  It is used by the majority party in the state to
 VH>>> "district out" sitting congressmen from the opposite party.

 EH>> That hasn't happened here as far as US Congressional districts are
 VH> concerned

 VH> Taking an example off the top of my head, George Allen of Virginia was
 VH> redistricted out of his congressional seat -- he ran for governor and
 VH> won, and then for the senate.

Okay. That was in Virginia.

 VH> In Texas, the Republican legislature challenged the districts as drawn
 VH> by the Democrats when they were in the majority, and redrew them.

I remember that. The Dems were so nice as to leave the state in protest. They
should have stayed out.

 VH>>> What do you mean "little change?"  It has been redistricted every ten
 VH>>> years -- if it were not so, Washington State Congressmen would not be
 VH>>> allowed to take their seats.

 EH>> It has been redrawn, but not like you claim.

 VH> What do you mean, "Not like you claim?" I claim it has been redrawn
 VH> every 10 years.  Are you saying it has NOT been redrawn?  That would
 VH> contradict your statement above.  Or are you saying it was NOT redrawn
 VH> based on the census?

No, I never said it has not been redrawn, I said the changes were minor and
reflected population movement.

 VH>>> Which is neither here nor there.  States MUST redistrict every ten
 VH>>> years.  And the state legislatures have virtually unlimited power as to
 VH>>> how they draw district lines.

 EH>> Usually, the state legislature here is so evenly distributed between the
two
 EH>> major parties that Congressional districts don't get the wild
gerrymandering
 EH>> you have described.

 VH> So?  The point I am making is that majority parties use redistricting to
 VH> STAY in the majority and hold down the other party.

The minority parties can make those claims all they want, but they have to
attract voters on their merrits.

 VH>>> So?  I can show you districts that have never had a Republican. But
 VH>>> that doesn't change the fact that districts have been drawn to
 VH>>> deliberately exclude a member of the other party.

 EH>> Washington State is one of the more liberal states, but we don't get
changes
 EH>> like you claim.

 VH> So?  The fact that it doesn't happen in your back yard doesn't mean it
 VH> doesn't happen.

Sheesh! We were talking about *my back yard*.

 EH>>>> We need honest politicians. I know, I know that's an oxymoron.

 VH>>> Start by enforcing the Constitution.

 EH>> Oh yeah, that'll make 'em honest.

 VH> Well, condoning violations of the Constitution certainly WON'T make them
 VH> honest!!

No one is condoning violations of the Constitution.

 VH> The essense of the Constitution, Ed, is that it assumes politicians are
 VH> NOT honest.  It therefore seeks to control and rein them in.

Is that right? Where does it make that assumption?

 VH> If you let them violate the Constitution, you give up all protection.

Who is letting them violate the Constitution?

 VH>>> No.  In some cases you may be right, but there have been many
 VH> egregious
 VH>>> redistricting acts -- Elbridge Gerry's Gerrymander being a classic
 VH>>> example.

 EH>> You have no idea what you are talking about here in Washington.

 VH> Ed?  We are talking about the Constitiution, which means we are talking
 VH> about the whole of the United States, not just your back yard.

Nope, this started as a discussion about my back yard.

 VH>>> Do you think it's not?  You've seen things lke Campaign Finance Reform
 VH>>> and you believe that INCREASES the power of the people?

 EH>> What do you propose be done about it.

 VH> To start with, let's STOP condoning violations of the Constitution just
 VH> because we might approve of that particular violation, or don't see the
 VH> evil in our back yards.

Good grief.

 VH>>> And yet you favor a tactic much used by those very politicians.  and on
 VH>>> which violates the Constitution.

 EH>> A person living outside the district they want to represent is more
likely t
 EH>> be a professional politician than someone living inside that district.

 VH> And that's worth trashing the Constitution for?

No one is "trashing the Constitution."

Ed

-- 
"But the safety of the people of America against dangers from
foreign force depends not only on their forbearing to give
just causes of war to other nations, but also on their placing
and continuing themselves in such a situation as not to invite
hostility or insult; for it need not be observed that there are
pretended as well as just causes of war."

-- John Jay (Federalist No. 4)

Registered Linux User# 416016
Registered Linux Machine# 323569

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060717 Debian/1.
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Fidonet Via Your Newsreader (1:123/789.0)