Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:07 AM
 
550 posts, read 368,507 times
Reputation: 883

Advertisements

If blacks ever get tired of sacrificing their children's education to let Democrats get support/money from teacher unions, the Democrat party will be finished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Richmond, VA
5,047 posts, read 6,346,699 times
Reputation: 7204
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
In addition, the PA Legislature passed a law (ACT 77) that directly violates PA's state constitution. What they needed to do instead of passing an unconstitutional law was to amend their state constitution. They failed to do so.
Really? Supreme Court didn't seem to think so. They seemed to think the States handled their own election rules, like you're all shrieking is the reason that Congress can't dictate to the States. Notice the modifier in front of 'Court'...'Supreme'. As in the last word. If Congress can't, other states certainly shouldn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Richmond, VA
5,047 posts, read 6,346,699 times
Reputation: 7204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ryun View Post
So, your "not favorite source" that you used is a right wing extremist propaganda source?


Just say that you're cool with the widespread GOP efforts to ensure that minorities can't vote.
I, for one, am really grateful they are trying to criminalize handing water to someone waiting in a line in Georgia. That was a critical election issue, and not a thinly disguised voter suppression tactic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:32 AM
 
13,602 posts, read 4,929,902 times
Reputation: 9687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Take a History Class View Post
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-...se-bill/1/text


Nothing like slogging through the real thing. You two have fun!
Hard to wade through the whole thing. I searched for a summary from an objective source:

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress, and was published on Jan 4, 2021. Blue text is my opinions:

For the People Act of 2021

This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.

Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls. Good. We should all WANT everyone that is eligible to vote. The people got a taste of early and mail-in voting in 2020. So much easier and logical; who wants to go backwards?

The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting. Great. No more gerrymandering

Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems. Good

Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices. Great. Too much money in politics

The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House. Good

The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns. Good. If a candidate has something to hide, then they shouldn't be elected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Long Island, N.Y.
6,933 posts, read 2,389,880 times
Reputation: 5004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
Hard to wade through the whole thing. I searched for a summary from an objective source:

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress, and was published on Jan 4, 2021. Blue text is my opinions:

For the People Act of 2021

This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.

Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls. Good. We should all WANT everyone that is eligible to vote. The people got a taste of early and mail-in voting in 2020. So much easier and logical; who wants to go backwards?

The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting. Great. No more gerrymandering

Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems. Good

Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices. Great. Too much money in politics

The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House. Good

The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns. Good. If a candidate has something to hide, then they shouldn't be elected.
Too bad it's completely UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:42 AM
 
13,602 posts, read 4,929,902 times
Reputation: 9687
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The other states in question failed to change their election laws via the State Legislature, as required by the US Constitution. Instead, members of the Executive and or Judicial branches in those states unilaterally made those changes, which is unconstitutional.

In addition, the PA Legislature passed a law (ACT 77) that directly violates PA's state constitution. What they needed to do instead of passing an unconstitutional law was to amend their state constitution. They failed to do so.
These are state laws and the PA state constitution you are referring to. Thus those questions are for the state Supreme Courts to decide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:44 AM
 
13,602 posts, read 4,929,902 times
Reputation: 9687
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaMaj7 View Post
Too bad it's completely UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

And who gets to decide if a law is unconstitutional or not? Is it SeaMaj7 or SCOTUS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:49 AM
 
13,284 posts, read 8,449,930 times
Reputation: 31512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
And who gets to decide if a law is unconstitutional or not? Is it SeaMaj7 or SCOTUS?
I'm going to pick door number two and say SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:51 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,000 posts, read 44,804,275 times
Reputation: 13698
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaTransplant View Post
Really? Supreme Court didn't seem to think so. They seemed to think the States handled their own election rules, like you're all shrieking is the reason that Congress can't dictate to the States. Notice the modifier in front of 'Court'...'Supreme'. As in the last word. If Congress can't, other states certainly shouldn't.
States are bound by the US Constitution. It's called the Supremacy Clause. SCOTUS had a duty to abide by it. This isn't the first time SCOTUS has dropped the ball. Even SCOTUS rulings get overturned.

US Constitution Supremacy Clause:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2021, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Long Island, N.Y.
6,933 posts, read 2,389,880 times
Reputation: 5004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
And who gets to decide if a law is unconstitutional or not? Is it SeaMaj7 or SCOTUS?
The Constitution is clear on this, Leo58.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:49 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top