Public Vote on Constitutional Amendments

[JohnFKennedy]

Please Vote Yea or Nay on the following three constitutional amendments:


----------------------------------------------------

1.

Supreme Court Jurisdiction and Authority Amendment[/u]

1. Article III Section 2 of the Constitution is hereby repealed.

2. No Court within the Forum, State, Regional or Federal, shall rule on a case unless the plaintiff shall have legal standing.

3. The Supreme Court shall be the sole body in the Forum with the authority to nullify or void federal laws.

4. The Supreme Court shall only be able to nullify or void a law in the event that the law explicitly contradicts the Constitution.

----------------------------------------------------

2.

Supremacy of the Constitution and Federal Law Amendment[/u]

1. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. All other forms of law are inferior to it.

2. Amendments to the Constitution are for all intents and purposes a part of the Constitution.

3. All federal law passed by the Senate is superior to any law or Constitution of the various Regions and States, as long as the said law is authorised by the Constitution.

----------------------------------------------------

3.

The definition of an organized party as stated in Article V, Clause 6 shall be changed to:

Any political party with a party platform and either five members or an elected official is to be considered an organized political party.


----------------------------------------------------

Poll should automatically lock in seven days.

[Jake]

The second amendment makes the federal government too powerfull, vote no.

[Blerpiez]

Yes
Yes
Abstain

[The Dowager Mod]

Yea on all 3
if the third passes i'm an official party!

[KEmperor]

Yea on all 3
if the third passes i'm an official party!

This is one of the main reasons I urge people to vote No on the third one.  Any elected offical who creates a 1 person party becomes an official party.

[King]

Yea on all 3
if the third passes i'm an official party!

This is one of the main reasons I urge people to vote No on the third one.  Any elected offical who creates a 1 person party becomes an official party.

Well no. Texasgurl needs to establish a platform aswell.

[Hermit]

Yea x 3

[ilikeverin]

Yea-Abstain-Yea

[Peter]

For a discussion of the necessity of the first two amendments, click HERE

[The Dowager Mod]

I would like to point out the fact that i opposed the third one.
means little or nothing to me if i'm an "official" party.
it is amusing though.

[Fritz]

Nay on the third, folks!  Did the Senate actually pass this?  I find that hard to believe.  Under these rules, someone can get elected, then create their own party once in office, and that would have to be considered an organised party.  Its absurd.

[Nation]

It's a loophole that really needs to be addressed.

[King]

Nay on the third, folks!  Did the Senate actually pass this?  I find that hard to believe.  Under these rules, someone can get elected, then create their own party once in office, and that would have to be considered an organised party.  Its absurd.

We considered that when we passed it, but we fixed the loophole by requiring a written party platform.

[Jake]

1) Yea
2) Nay
3) Yea

[Siege40]

Yay across the board.

Siege

[Defarge]

Yea for all

[Akno21]

Nay on the third, folks!  Did the Senate actually pass this?  I find that hard to believe.  Under these rules, someone can get elected, then create their own party once in office, and that would have to be considered an organised party.  Its absurd.

I agree with Fritz. I was inclined to vote yes, due to the "freedom" principles I hold, but really, do you consider the RFB to be a organzied party? Under this amendment, it would be.

[King]

Nay on the third, folks!  Did the Senate actually pass this?  I find that hard to believe.  Under these rules, someone can get elected, then create their own party once in office, and that would have to be considered an organised party.  Its absurd.

I agree with Fritz. I was inclined to vote yes, due to the "freedom" principles I hold, but really, do you consider the RFB to be a organzied party? Under this amendment, it would be.

Again, Texasgurl would have to write a detailed party platform for her RFB to be considered "organized". Read the amendment.

[Gustaf]

Yea/abstain/yea

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Yay/Nay/Nay

[TheBulldog]

3 Yays

[minionofmidas]

Abstain/Yea/Abstain.
I abstained on the first one on account of clause 2.
I am not at all sure what the third one is supposed to do or why it is supposedly needed.

[Sulfur]

Surely an amendment to the Constitution cannot make itself Supreme. If it did that, it would mean the Constitution was already Supreme.

Nay/Abstain/Nay

[Bono]

Surely an amendment to the Constitution cannot make itself Supreme. If it did that, it would mean the Constitution was already Supreme.

Nay/Abstain/Nay

Are you registered?

[Sulfur]

Yes, I registered earlier, but my registration wasn't effective until I got 18 posts