Why not a National Referendum on Major Issues?

None ^ | 10/25/05 | SQUID

[SQUID]

I think you would sound more intelligent if you actually had some good ideas.

So let's see your next article that you write. I'll even give you all day to proof read it instead of the 5 minutes it took me to write mine.

You don't like to see mistakes? Don't comment...go to another thread.

[BikerNYC]

You need a stronger argument for changing our form of constitutional gov't than you happen to like some of the results.

Why? I would think whether or not people like the results of a particular form of government is the only reason they would need to keep it or change it.

It's not much of a change, anyway. We already do it. For every good referendum there are bad ones. For every good decision by a legislature there are bad ones.

[SoothingDave]

I think you would sound more intelligent if you actually had some good ideas.

Perhaps you should try reading my post again. I explained to you many of the reasons why your idea is unworkable. And inadvisable.

So let's see your next article that you write. I'll even give you all day to proof read it instead of the 5 minutes it took me to write mine.

I don't post vanities. Take a whole day next time to proof read. There's nothing timely about your idea.

You don't like to see mistakes? Don't comment...go to another thread.

If you are looking for an Amen Corner, post your tripe elsewhere. Free Repulic is supposed to be for the discussion of news and ideas about government. Not arguments for abandoning our republic for an absolute democracy.

SD

[SoothingDave]

You need a stronger argument for changing our form of constitutional gov't than you happen to like some of the results.

Why?

Why? Why? The Framers of our Constitution knew why direct democracy was a bad idea. Why not study them?

It's not much of a change, anyway. We already do it.

Who already does it? Did I miss the last big National Referendum? I thought this was someone's lamebrain suggestion that we radically alter our Constitution. Now I hear we already do this?

SD

[BikerNYC]

No. Why do I need another reason other than whether or not I like the results? That seems to be a good guide.

You see. We do it on a state level now all the time. Now just expand that concept in your mind. Imagine all 50 states voting on the same issue at the same time. It's just a little bit more than what we do now. Kind of like Powerball - a multi-state effort.

[SoothingDave]

No. Why do I need another reason other than whether or not I like the results? That seems to be a good guide.

I guess if you don't want to have a philosophy, take heed of history, or think about the future, that's one option. Just think about short-term results.

You see. We do it on a state level now all the time. Now just expand that concept in your mind. Imagine all 50 states voting on the same issue at the same time. It's just a little bit more than what we do now. Kind of like Powerball - a multi-state effort.

Like I said, it's a bad idea because the public is fickle and ignorant. This is why we have a representative republic.

And like I also said, this would require an amendment that will never happen.

So, to sum up, it's a foolish idea and it will ever happen. So, other than that, I think it's great.

SD

[BikerNYC]

Like I said, it's a bad idea because the public is ... ignorant.

No. Just some members of the public.