Which parts of this constitutional amendment do you like?

<< < (2/2)

Alcon:
I've never understood the idea of requiring a supermajority for tax hikes. The explanation I get from supporters just seems to be "tax hikes are bad." Why shouldn't I, for instance, demand a supermajority for things I disagree with?

A18:
The money of hardworking people should not be spent without due cause; and this ensures that it will not.

KEmperor:
One and Four.  While I like making rasing taxes difficult, majority should still rule in the House.

I do support an Amendment that every bill must require a section explaining where exactly in the Constituition they draw the power to do whatever they are proposing though.

A18:
Majority does not rule in the House on many matters, including the expulsion of representatives.

It has nothing to do without how much I like taxing and spending. That depends entirely on the situation, much like expelling congressmen. But clearly, both should be difficult.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page