Reform: The Legislation Edition

[P@triot]

The left has turned the federal government into an oppressive legislation machine - just churning out an endless new array of "you can't do this either" 24x7x365.

Legislation should be passed only when it is absolutely necessary. Of course, the litmus test for that will be near nonexistent for the Democrats (if they want it, they will deem it "absolutely necessary").

That's why we need a non-partisan, simple standard. Here it is:

• When the majority party passes new legislation, the minority party has the power to eliminate three existing pieces of legislation
• The new legislation by the majority party may not include legislation being eliminated by the minority party (ie one item per bill).
• The legislation that the minority party is eliminating must be at least over a decade old (so that they may not eliminate something the majority party just passed)

This will ensure that the party in power will not pass legislation willy-nilly simply because they can. They now have a very real stake in the "game". They will only pass what they deem absolutely vital, knowing that they will lose three old bills.

And in the end, the American people are the real winners. More freedom. And only legislation that is absolutely necessary.

 

[my2¢]

Legislation should be passed only when it is absolutely necessary.

I agree with that, but your proposed changes is sort of like replacing election winners and losers with participation awards.

 

[alang1216]

The left has turned the federal government into an oppressive legislation machine - just churning out an endless new array of "you can't do this either" 24x7x365.

Legislation should be passed only when it is absolutely necessary. Of course, the litmus test for that will be near nonexistent for the Democrats (if they want it, they will deem it "absolutely necessary").

That's why we need a non-partisan, simple standard. Here it is:

• When the majority party passes new legislation, the minority party has the power to eliminate three existing pieces of legislation
• The new legislation by the majority party may not include legislation being eliminated by the minority party (ie one item per bill).
• The legislation that the minority party is eliminating must be at least over a decade old (so that they may not eliminate something the majority party just passed)

This will ensure that the party in power will not pass legislation willy-nilly simply because they can. They now have a very real stake in the "game". They will only pass what they deem absolutely vital, knowing that they will lose three old bills.

And in the end, the American people are the real winners. More freedom. And only legislation that is absolutely necessary.

Can we start with the new laws aimed at restricting voting in light of unproven voter fraud allegations?

 

[P@triot]

I agree with that, but your proposed changes is sort of like replacing election winners and losers with participation awards.

The fact that you even view it as “winners” and “losers” is why you’ll never understand the point of this thread.

We’re all Americans who suffer under federal laws. But all you see is a competition and you believe the “reward” for the “winner” is unfettered power to do whatever they desire.

 

[P@triot]

Can we start with the new laws aimed at restricting voting in light of unproven voter fraud allegations?

1. There are no laws “restricting voting”. Not one.
2. Voter fraud has been overwhelmingly exposed. In fact, Democrats in NY want the heads of other Democrats because they just had a massive voter fraud incident in their own primary.

Sadly, you are terribly uninformed about this subject matter.

 

[alang1216]

Can we start with the new laws aimed at restricting voting in light of unproven voter fraud allegations?

1. There are no laws “restricting voting”. Not one.
2. Voter fraud has been overwhelmingly exposed. In fact, Democrats in NY want the heads of other Democrats because they just had a massive voter fraud incident in their own primary.

Sadly, you are terribly uninformed about this subject matter.

Shortening the hours and days polls are open or making absentee voting harder certainly doesn't make it easier to vote.

So far as I can see, NYC's vote was chaotic but there was no fraud.

 

[my2¢]

I agree with that, but your proposed changes is sort of like replacing election winners and losers with participation awards.

The fact that you even view it as “winners” and “losers” is why you’ll never understand the point of this thread.

We’re all Americans who suffer under federal laws. But all you see is a competition and you believe the “reward” for the “winner” is unfettered power to do whatever they desire.

Your point seems to be a proposal to legislate stagnation, as substitute for the will of the people.

As I wrote, I agree with the premise that limited legislation is good and thus I do not see stagnation as a bad thing. In fact, I find stagnation preferrable and do what I can to accomplish that through my ballot. Specifically, if I cast my vote for the Democratic candidate for the presidency, then in voting for my congressman in the House I'll pick the Republican. And vice-versa.

How about you, what way have you found to practice what you preach? Frankly I find it ironic that given the voters ability to control for themselves the amount of power they wish to give a single political party, I see your idea as just more unnecessary legislation. Sure, things don't always go my way but I see no need to hold elections if they don't have consequences.

 

[P@triot]

So far as I can see, NYC's vote was chaotic but there was no fraud.

Because you see what you want to see. You want to see “chaotic”. But 135,000 fucking thousand illegal votes isn’t “chaotic” - it’s mass fraud.

 

[P@triot]

Shortening the hours and days polls are open or making absentee voting harder certainly doesn't make it easier to vote.

You’re literally spreading pure propaganda.

The first thing is it expands voting. For example, we added additional weekend voting. As we know, a lot of folks are working during the week, but they still like that process of going to the polls in person. This gives them more opportunities on the weekend when they may not be working.

It also allows drop boxes. In the past, there was never a drop box in Georgia law. It was only put in place during the emergency order for the COVID-19 pandemic. We added them, but made sure they’d be inside in secure locations. Obviously, we want the votes to be protected.

What Media Got Wrong on Georgia's New Election Law

"The media missed most of it," Georgia state Sen. John Albers says about coverage of Georgia's election legislation.

www.dailysignal.com

 

[P@triot]

Your point seems to be a proposal to legislate stagnation, as substitute for the will of the people.

Not even remotely close to my point. I’m not the least bit interested in “stagnation”.

Additionally, your “will of the people” comment is pure nonsense. Unless a party submitted a full list of legislation they propose to enact - and stuck to that list - then being voted in had nothing to do with “the will of the people” as the people have no way to predict what new legislation will be created over the next few years.

Further still, your bullshit “will of the people” is legally required to be enacted at the local level. So they can legislate away there. Unlimited legislation.

But at the federal level, the US Constitution explicitly restricts the federal government to 18 enumerated powers.

 

[my2¢]

But at the federal level, the US Constitution explicitly restricts the federal government to 18 enumerated powers.

Political parties are not spoken of anywhere in the US Constitution. All 3 points of your proposal set out to limit the power of the elected majority by empowering the minority political party. So as for your claim that it isn't about stagnation, well as they say, if it looks like a duck.....

I do consider the risk of unnecessary/undesireable legislation heightened when a single party has control of the White House and both chambers of congress. Thus I vote accordingly to address that concern. It may not always go my way but I sure don't want to see Mickey Mouse rules put in place that weaken our concept of a constitutional republic.

 

[alang1216]

So far as I can see, NYC's vote was chaotic but there was no fraud.

Because you see what you want to see. You want to see “chaotic”. But 135,000 fucking thousand illegal votes isn’t “chaotic” - it’s mass fraud.

There were sample ballots inadvertently counted. It was quickly caught. NO FRAUD!

 

[alang1216]

Shortening the hours and days polls are open or making absentee voting harder certainly doesn't make it easier to vote.

You’re literally spreading pure propaganda.

The first thing is it expands voting. For example, we added additional weekend voting. As we know, a lot of folks are working during the week, but they still like that process of going to the polls in person. This gives them more opportunities on the weekend when they may not be working.

It also allows drop boxes. In the past, there was never a drop box in Georgia law. It was only put in place during the emergency order for the COVID-19 pandemic. We added them, but made sure they’d be inside in secure locations. Obviously, we want the votes to be protected.

What Media Got Wrong on Georgia's New Election Law

"The media missed most of it," Georgia state Sen. John Albers says about coverage of Georgia's election legislation.

www.dailysignal.com

Here are the most significant changes to voting in the state, as written into the new (Georgia) law:​

• Voters will now have less time to request absentee ballots.
• There are strict new ID requirements for absentee ballots.
• It’s now illegal for election officials to mail out absentee ballot applications to all voters.
• Drop boxes still exist … but barely.
• Mobile voting centers (think an R.V. where you can vote) are essentially banned.
• Early voting is expanded in a lot of small counties, but probably not in more populous ones.
• Offering food or water to voters waiting in line now risks misdemeanor charges.
• If you go to the wrong polling place, it will be (even) harder to vote.
• If election problems arise, a common occurrence, it is now more difficult to extend voting hours.
• With a mix of changes to vote-counting, high-turnout elections will probably mean a long wait for results.
• Election officials can no longer accept third-party funding (a measure that nods to right-wing conspiracy theories).
• With an eye toward voter fraud, the state attorney general will manage an election hotline.
• The Republican-controlled legislature has more control over the State Election Board.
• The secretary of state is removed as a voting member of the State Election Board.
• The G.O.P.-led legislature is empowered to suspend county election officials.
• Runoff elections will happen faster — and could become harder to manage.

 

[P@triot]

All 3 points of your proposal set out to limit the power of the elected majority

Not even remotely true. That’s what you want my points to be. But that’s not even remotely what they are.

Since the minority party cannot touch anything in the last 10 years, how the fuck does it “limit” the power of the elected majority? How?

by empowering the minority political party.

Yet again, not even remotely true. My points are that we are over-legislated (more than 30,000 federal laws and counting) and to curb that nightmare, we need to be eliminating that which is no longer relevant.

 

[P@triot]

So as for your claim that it isn't about stagnation, well as they say, if it looks like a duck.....

Unfortunately though, your dumb ass is pointing at an elephant while screaming “if it looks like a duck”

 

[P@triot]

It may not always go my way but I sure don't want to see Mickey Mouse rules put in place that weaken our concept of a constitutional republic.

What’s “Mickey Mouse” about eliminating some of the 30,000 federal laws? Only a totalitarian supports that level of legislation from a body tasked with 18 specific responsibilities only.

 

[P@triot]

• There are strict new ID requirements for absentee ballots.

Gasp! Someone voting “absentee” must prove they are who they claim to be? Oh the horrors! The horrors, I tell you!

That doesn’t even remotely “restrict” voting. The absentee option is still there as much as it ever was. You’re literally upset that it will be harder for the Dumbocrats to engage in voter fraud. When will you people finally just come out admit it (as you’ve done with socialism and pedophilia)?

 

[P@triot]

• Drop boxes still exist … but barely.

More propaganda from you fascists! Drop boxes never existed before in Georgia. Never. Now they have been added. Why? Because the voter law expands voting but restricts cheating (the two things you people don’t want).

 

[P@triot]

• Early voting is expanded in a lot of small counties, but probably not in more populous ones.

Yawn! More propaganda. Who presents “probably” in a discussion/debate? Who? You’re side is incapable of dealing in facts.

And let’s just pretend for the moment that it turns out to be true? So? So what? If early voting is expanded in even the smallest county in all of Georgia, it still expands voting.

 

[P@triot]

• With an eye toward voter fraud, the state attorney general will manage an election hotline.

Wait…you actually want to argue that a state “hotline” for reporting fraud somehow restricts voting?

Seriously sweetie, did you even read your hot-garbage before posting it, or did you do the typical left-wing blind cut & paste.