Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Principled
It appears, from a casual reading anyway, That two issues were examined, the 2/3's vote and a const. amd. stating that there had to be a budget passed by July 1. July 1 has come and gone, ruling on that one would not work too well. They cannot force the legislature to vote a particular way to come up with 2/3, so options are running low. If they quash the July 1 deadline, they are overturning a law, if they do away with the 2/3 they are doing the same thing.

The questions remain though, and many of them for me: Will the 2/3 stand only until July 1 each year, after which it will require a simple majority? What remedy was in the State Const. for the budget battle going beyond that date?

When two seperate laws run head on into each other (or two parts of same law as case may be) then the courts have to step in and look at it. The legislature in this case has already ignored the part which stated July 1 was the deadline - perhaps they themselves should be fined $1000/day per person until they solve it :)

101 posted on 07/14/2003 7:01:20 PM PDT by chance33_98 (http://home.frognet.net/~thowell/haunt/ ---->our ghosty page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]


To: chance33_98
The questions remain though, and many of them for me: Will the 2/3 stand only until July 1 each year, after which it will require a simple majority?

Indeed this is evil. Dems will simply delay until the deadline is passed every year.

IMO the court should not change the required majority, but should, as you say, fine legislators daily. They'll come to an agreement, pronto. If they don't, they get big fines and lose their jobs too.

102 posted on 07/14/2003 7:07:13 PM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

To: chance33_98
Will the 2/3 stand only until July 1 each year, after which it will require a simple majority?

No. this is where it goes crazy. The 2/3 requirement and hte July 1 requirement are not incompatible in principle, so there is no way that "after July 1" the 2/3 requirement expires. That kind of reading is just silly--it's klike not even trying. They both stay in force. The time requirement was violated; so sanction those who violated it, if that is wanted. But that fact has no relation to the 2/3 requirement. there is no ocntingnet relation between the two. It is a sad commentary on the lack of education in the country that they could keep straight faces while doing such brutality to logic.

109 posted on 07/14/2003 7:46:12 PM PDT by ontos-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

To: chance33_98
Will the 2/3 stand only until July 1 each year, after which it will require a simple majority?

No. this is where it goes crazy. The 2/3 requirement and hte July 1 requirement are not incompatible in principle, so there is no way that "after July 1" the 2/3 requirement expires. That kind of reading is just silly--it's klike not even trying. They both stay in force. The time requirement was violated; so sanction those who violated it, if that is wanted. But that fact has no relation to the 2/3 requirement. there is no ocntingnet relation between the two. It is a sad commentary on the lack of education in the country that they could keep straight faces while doing such brutality to logic.

110 posted on 07/14/2003 7:46:17 PM PDT by ontos-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson