117th Congress: DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!111!!

[French Rage]

Has he gotten crazier or just louder? https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovemen...gencies-video/

[dxmnkd316]

We might be closer to a constitutional convention.

https://news.yahoo.com/second-consti...113948818.html

We were something like three state legislature seats away from it about a decade ago.

[bronconick]

We might be closer to a constitutional convention.

https://news.yahoo.com/second-consti...113948818.html

...that article said Pennsylvania would be the 20th state to ask for said convention. 20 out of 34 needed. That's not exactly enough to worry me. If it's 30 out of 34, I'll start sweating.

[Kepler]

We might be closer to a constitutional convention.

https://news.yahoo.com/second-consti...113948818.html

The Nazis really want this and it's probably the way democracy would die for good in the US, if that were ever to happen.

They know they are at most 30% of the population, and less each year as the white derp percentage drops and people become more educated and less religious. It is much more likely they will attempt to attain permanent minority authoritarian rule this way than by direct use of paramilitary force, if only because the Plutes would cut a deal with them to end taxation and regulation, whereas they would not back a civil war because of the risk to their personal wealth.

[SonofSouthie]

I think swan is asking why can't we have an amendment. Correct me if I'm wrong swan.

and the answer to that is we could, we just won't because we're closer to a constitutional amendment banning democrats than anything not fascist.

We might be closer to a constitutional convention.

https://news.yahoo.com/second-consti...113948818.html

[Kepler]

For clarity, the 26th only says you have to allow 18 year olds to vote. It doesn't prevent states from allowing younger people to vote if they want.

I did not know this.

[unofan]

This.

There are four minimum ages in the Constitution: 18 for voting (26th Amendment), 25 for the House (Article I), 30 for the Senate (Article I), 35 for President (Article II).

The only way to add a maximum age is by Amendment.

For clarity, the 26th only says you have to allow 18 year olds to vote. It doesn't prevent states from allowing younger people to vote if they want.

[unofan]

I think swan is asking why can't we have an amendment. Correct me if I'm wrong swan.

and the answer to that is we could, we just won't because we're closer to a constitutional amendment banning democrats than anything not fascist.

I mean, it surely doesn't help that Kepler muddied the waters with his philosophical rant about adults versus children that could've been stolen straight from a Thomas opinion rather than just giving the simple answer that the minimum age is in the Constitution.

[dxmnkd316]

I think swan is asking why can't we have an amendment. Correct me if I'm wrong swan.

and the answer to that is we could, we just won't because we're closer to a constitutional amendment banning democrats than anything not fascist.

[unofan]

You have to be 35 to run for President, is my point. How would a maximum limit be unconstitutional but not a minimum limit?



Again, honestly asking here, not arguing.

Because it's literally in the constitution as a requirement. There's no maximum age in the constitution.

Courts have consistently held that you can't place any extra conditions on federal offices besides what's already in the constitution without amending the constitution.

[Handyman]

Are term limits off the table?

Why would anyone vote to be out of a job?

Term limits is just one of those things minority parties whine about because they want to be the majority.

(unless you are asking if we support it and in that case I am 50/50)

[Kepler]

Are term limits off the table?

Term limits have their own problems, at least for legislatures, by concentrating even more power in lobbyists. I would support term limits along with banning all political bribery.

I saw an interesting idea for SCOTUS. Each President gets one appointment every Congress (i.e., every two years), regardless of how many sitting judges retire or not. Justices can no longer time their exits to create new openings, and also won't feel they are trapped when the President is an ideological enemy. While a craven SML (cough, Mitch) can still stop an appointment, they cannot pass an extra appointment to the next President. It would help calm down the SCOTUS confirmation process, at least a little.

Also, these are not necessarily long term systemic problems. The GOP won't persist as a Nazi party hampering democracy indefinitely. It will either succeed, in which case we have way bigger problems than court composition, or it will fail and reform around democratic republican ideals again, and probably leave a nasty stench on conservatism for a generation or more.

We lasted for 250 years during which a lot of very sh-tty people were both inside government and also in the private sector attacking and abusing government. This is an inflection point, but inflection points are by definition eventually over -- one way or the other. This is one reason I support aggressive actions like +6 SCOTUS justices. The GOP will not always be demonic, it will either explode into open terrorism (it is close, now) and be put down with all available force (this country is and always will be run by and for the rich, and civil war is terrible for them), or splinter and then recoalesce as a non-cancerous, normal right wing idiot party as in the days of Reagan. We need to get through right now. Time and social forces will take us where they will after that.

[Slap Shot]

Are term limits off the table?

[Kepler]

The only way to add a maximum age is by Amendment.

There are maximum ages for state judges. I don't know if there are any maximum ages for other state office holders (Governor, State Senator, etc).

Apparently the Senate (of all places) passed a bill in 1954 making 75 the maximum age for a federal judge, but it did not become law. Given The Olds continue to grow older and larger as a percentage of the population, I think we missed our chance to be rid of them, er, us.

The fierce protection of turf by the senile combined with the idea that the voters can vote out a decrepit incumbent (naively based on the idea that voters actually choose their Members) probably make this impossible. FTL and scoot.

[Jimjamesak]

The minimum limit is written into the constitution, the maximum limit is not.

This.

There are four minimum ages in the Constitution: 18 for voting (26th Amendment), 25 for the House (Article I), 30 for the Senate (Article I), 35 for President (Article II).

The only way to add a maximum age is by Amendment.