If the Commission on Presidential Debates can set the bar to admission such that a 15% showing in the polls is required, can they not also set the bar at 51%? Is it true that an agency can spend public funds to organize and support a single party?
When will we see a nationwide campaign encouraging people not to vote if they don't care? Or what about people who just don't have the time to do the homework? I know too many people who vote based purely on party or distant relationship than on merit.
Much safter transportation, my 1979 HD sportster. It has 3 circuits, a headlight, a taillight/break light, and the ignition coil. It has two fuses. It has no speedometer, no rear shock absorber, no front break, and no windshield. I ride without a helmet.
This is a good question, if a bit short on the grammar... anyway It won't be asked as part of this survey. I submitted almost the same thing, as did others, and neither made the top 50.
Such a question requires the asker, and those voting on the top 50, to actually understand balance, and the notion that there are some laws the federal government cannot pass, but the states can... and vice versa.
Until folks from coast to coast stop thinking of themselves as only as citizens of "America" and not citizens of "My State," they're not ready to ask this question.
Worse than the design, is the fact that you don't get to see the names of the electors you're actually voting for. I mean, their vote may be pretty much a foregone conclusion, but I'd like to know who I'm picking just in case.
What exactly is wrong with paper voting? Electronic voting is just as prone to error if it has a working human interface, and prone to abuse if does not. I think a few trees every year is a small price to pay for my democracy.
Sadly, it is often as much the fault of 3rd party candidates and campaigns that they are not included in the debates. Third parties seem to fail, year by year, to do their homework.
Generally, to get into any debate whether it be persidential, state, or local, one needs only to contact the organizing agency before they finalize things and start doing press releases. Most 3rd party campaigns do not do their homework, do not maintain contact with the other parties, and do not find out in advance who's hosting a debate. Thus, they show up after the rules are set and the advertising paid, and demand to be included.
Granted, this does not absolve the most recent accord on debates from responsibility for the clause which prohibits BUSH and KERRY from debating anyone else... but you can see where the problem lies most often.
To avoid risks like voter information going to India, more states should do as North Dakota has done. In North Dakota we have no voter registration, just show up with proof of residence for 30 days, or sign an statement to that effect when you arrive at the polling place.
(Of course in ND, the poll workers know pretty much everyone... and any fraudulent change in the total number of votes in a precinct would get spotted before the day was out.)
Given the text of the 21st amendment to the United States' constitution which repealed prohibition, I don't know that the Federal government actually has the authority to regulate alcohol on that scale. As such, is this a question that really applies to presidential candidates?
Does it seem that this question is loaded with bias against the electoral system? I think a question regarding the future of the electoral college is a good one, but this one seems loaded.
Perhaps it would be better to ask whether the influence of the electors should be removed, maintained, or increased?
Actually, if you GIVE me a car, the IRS does not consider that taxable income. If I pay a cent for it, my basis is one cent and I can be taxed when I sell that car... (Though frankly I'd probably keep a one cent car around as a conversation piece.) By contrast, if I WIN the car in a contest, then it is considered income.
There is of course the gift tax, but for that to apply the total give needs to exceed $10,000 in value between two people in a given year. And then of course there are other exclusions...
Please do not construe any of this as legal advice. I need to get a sig to that effect.
I would disagree with your assertion that free does not equal noneconomic - how then do you define transactions that are noneconomic if not be the "no money changed hands" bar?
Up to this point the courts have always held that there must be a distinction between that wich is econonomic and that which is not, as well as the seldom applied distinction between "Truly Local" economic activity and that which affects interstate commerce.
On the other hand, if nobody ever complained, argued, flamed, or even occasionally trolled,/. would be a very dull place indeed. There's no point in discussion if everyone already agrees.
(It'd be like some of those christian radio programs where two guys just go back and fourth saying stuff and agreeing with each other.)
You raise a good point. It is possible that the regulation would be re-drafted to prevent disemination through the internet as a "channel of interstate commerce" but I don't believe that is how it is presently drafted. I for one would love to make the "unconstitutionally vague" argument. This redraft would certainly slow the distribution, but would not render it illegal nor prevent communication by other means.
On the other hand, we may again revisit the argument that software is speech. This would prevent most limits on its transmission through commercial channels.
These cases state that where the activity is noneconomic, the argument that an aggregate effect will occur in interstate commerce cannot be used to support federal action. Each individual act must have a significant effect on interstate commerce, or must be economic activity and have the potential for an aggregate effect.
A single transfer of software does not have a significant effect on interstate commerce, and it is noneconomic when given for free - thus an aggregate argument cannot be applied and there remains no basis for Federal regulation.
You make a good point. As anyone who reads my past posts can tell you I spend hours pontificating on the virtues of local solutions for local needs rather than our prevalent "all laws come from Washington DC, all entertainment comes from Holywood" approach. Before TV there were local bands, theater,and the local courthouse... they still work, and they're still as good as any Reality TV we get now.
Of course you have to schedule around them, no time shifting... but then it looks like we can't do that anymore anyway.
Recent supreme court cases such as Morrison and Lopez stop federal regulation of activities that are "non-commercial." This means if nothing commercial is transpiring, the activity cannot be regulated under the commerce power (this is the same authority used to establish the flag in the first place.)
Open source software that is not sold, is freely available, and freely modifiable is very much non-commercial and therefore not subject to this regulation.
Thus, and IAAL (I get sworn in TOMOROW) but not a techie anymore, it seems that if there is any way to get a signal to your computer, a free, open source software program could render it - and no laws would be broken.
Actually, I'd prefer it if I could just let my electors look at the record, values, vision, and plan of each candidate and decide based on that. I figure its better to elect someone I know from my state to sift through all the 1/2 truths and spin, to actually read the voting records, to really research all the candidates and then make a vote for my state.
Is that with 50 states using systems tailored to their own local needs selecting their electors, there are 50 chances that someone might "hack" the process and change the result. I don't mean Diebold flaws either - there are many states where a person might run as a 3rd party candidate in just ONE state, just to push a major national candidate over the top.
The end result is, a few individuals can easily adjust the outcome if they're ambitious - so mathematical predictions are of little value.
Actually, I can't recommend the basket case highly enough if you have the time to restore it. Cash-wise they'll always let you come out ahead, and style-wise you cannot beat a "classic" bike that you rebuilt yourself.
Now of course maintenance is always a concern, and if you just want transportation in town and don't mind the occasional snicker, the moped is the way to go.
These bikes you mention, I've seen some that are solar powered too, they use cool biotech drive mechanisms to convert solar energy to chemical energy... then they burn the chemical energy and give off nothing but CO2, water, sweat, and depending on the means used to covert the solar energy, methane.
Slashdot Mirror
If the Commission on Presidential Debates can set the bar to admission such that a 15% showing in the polls is required, can they not also set the bar at 51%? Is it true that an agency can spend public funds to organize and support a single party?
This seems even more ripe for judicial review.
That is somewhat counter-intuitive:
When will we see a nationwide campaign encouraging people not to vote if they don't care? Or what about people who just don't have the time to do the homework? I know too many people who vote based purely on party or distant relationship than on merit.
Something about being perfectly safe six feet under ground.
Much safter transportation, my 1979 HD sportster. It has 3 circuits, a headlight, a taillight/break light, and the ignition coil. It has two fuses. It has no speedometer, no rear shock absorber, no front break, and no windshield. I ride without a helmet.
I'm STILL Safer than this guy!
This is a good question, if a bit short on the grammar... anyway It won't be asked as part of this survey. I submitted almost the same thing, as did others, and neither made the top 50.
Such a question requires the asker, and those voting on the top 50, to actually understand balance, and the notion that there are some laws the federal government cannot pass, but the states can... and vice versa.
Until folks from coast to coast stop thinking of themselves as only as citizens of "America" and not citizens of "My State," they're not ready to ask this question.
When will we see a prize offered to spur development of civilian & commercial antimatter weapons?
Worse than the design, is the fact that you don't get to see the names of the electors you're actually voting for. I mean, their vote may be pretty much a foregone conclusion, but I'd like to know who I'm picking just in case.
Does not mean we should.
What exactly is wrong with paper voting? Electronic voting is just as prone to error if it has a working human interface, and prone to abuse if does not. I think a few trees every year is a small price to pay for my democracy.
Sadly, it is often as much the fault of 3rd party candidates and campaigns that they are not included in the debates. Third parties seem to fail, year by year, to do their homework.
Generally, to get into any debate whether it be persidential, state, or local, one needs only to contact the organizing agency before they finalize things and start doing press releases. Most 3rd party campaigns do not do their homework, do not maintain contact with the other parties, and do not find out in advance who's hosting a debate. Thus, they show up after the rules are set and the advertising paid, and demand to be included.
Granted, this does not absolve the most recent accord on debates from responsibility for the clause which prohibits BUSH and KERRY from debating anyone else... but you can see where the problem lies most often.
.
To avoid risks like voter information going to India, more states should do as North Dakota has done. In North Dakota we have no voter registration, just show up with proof of residence for 30 days, or sign an statement to that effect when you arrive at the polling place.
(Of course in ND, the poll workers know pretty much everyone... and any fraudulent change in the total number of votes in a precinct would get spotted before the day was out.)
Given the text of the 21st amendment to the United States' constitution which repealed prohibition, I don't know that the Federal government actually has the authority to regulate alcohol on that scale. As such, is this a question that really applies to presidential candidates?
Does it seem that this question is loaded with bias against the electoral system? I think a question regarding the future of the electoral college is a good one, but this one seems loaded.
Perhaps it would be better to ask whether the influence of the electors should be removed, maintained, or increased?
Actually, if you GIVE me a car, the IRS does not consider that taxable income. If I pay a cent for it, my basis is one cent and I can be taxed when I sell that car... (Though frankly I'd probably keep a one cent car around as a conversation piece.) By contrast, if I WIN the car in a contest, then it is considered income.
There is of course the gift tax, but for that to apply the total give needs to exceed $10,000 in value between two people in a given year. And then of course there are other exclusions...
Please do not construe any of this as legal advice. I need to get a sig to that effect.
I would disagree with your assertion that free does not equal noneconomic - how then do you define transactions that are noneconomic if not be the "no money changed hands" bar?
Up to this point the courts have always held that there must be a distinction between that wich is econonomic and that which is not, as well as the seldom applied distinction between "Truly Local" economic activity and that which affects interstate commerce.
On the other hand, if nobody ever complained, argued, flamed, or even occasionally trolled, /. would be a very dull place indeed. There's no point in discussion if everyone already agrees.
(It'd be like some of those christian radio programs where two guys just go back and fourth saying stuff and agreeing with each other.)
You raise a good point. It is possible that the regulation would be re-drafted to prevent disemination through the internet as a "channel of interstate commerce" but I don't believe that is how it is presently drafted. I for one would love to make the "unconstitutionally vague" argument. This redraft would certainly slow the distribution, but would not render it illegal nor prevent communication by other means.
On the other hand, we may again revisit the argument that software is speech. This would prevent most limits on its transmission through commercial channels.
These cases state that where the activity is noneconomic, the argument that an aggregate effect will occur in interstate commerce cannot be used to support federal action. Each individual act must have a significant effect on interstate commerce, or must be economic activity and have the potential for an aggregate effect.
A single transfer of software does not have a significant effect on interstate commerce, and it is noneconomic when given for free - thus an aggregate argument cannot be applied and there remains no basis for Federal regulation.
You make a good point. As anyone who reads my past posts can tell you I spend hours pontificating on the virtues of local solutions for local needs rather than our prevalent "all laws come from Washington DC, all entertainment comes from Holywood" approach. Before TV there were local bands, theater,and the local courthouse... they still work, and they're still as good as any Reality TV we get now.
Of course you have to schedule around them, no time shifting... but then it looks like we can't do that anymore anyway.
KUDOS to you!
Recent supreme court cases such as Morrison and Lopez stop federal regulation of activities that are "non-commercial." This means if nothing commercial is transpiring, the activity cannot be regulated under the commerce power (this is the same authority used to establish the flag in the first place.)
Open source software that is not sold, is freely available, and freely modifiable is very much non-commercial and therefore not subject to this regulation.
Thus, and IAAL (I get sworn in TOMOROW) but not a techie anymore, it seems that if there is any way to get a signal to your computer, a free, open source software program could render it - and no laws would be broken.
Both my wife & I were hired before we graduated, and we don't even have technical or hard science degrees. Seems pretty good to me.
Actually, I'd prefer it if I could just let my electors look at the record, values, vision, and plan of each candidate and decide based on that. I figure its better to elect someone I know from my state to sift through all the 1/2 truths and spin, to actually read the voting records, to really research all the candidates and then make a vote for my state.
Is that with 50 states using systems tailored to their own local needs selecting their electors, there are 50 chances that someone might "hack" the process and change the result. I don't mean Diebold flaws either - there are many states where a person might run as a 3rd party candidate in just ONE state, just to push a major national candidate over the top.
The end result is, a few individuals can easily adjust the outcome if they're ambitious - so mathematical predictions are of little value.
Actually, I can't recommend the basket case highly enough if you have the time to restore it. Cash-wise they'll always let you come out ahead, and style-wise you cannot beat a "classic" bike that you rebuilt yourself.
Now of course maintenance is always a concern, and if you just want transportation in town and don't mind the occasional snicker, the moped is the way to go.
These bikes you mention, I've seen some that are solar powered too, they use cool biotech drive mechanisms to convert solar energy to chemical energy... then they burn the chemical energy and give off nothing but CO2, water, sweat, and depending on the means used to covert the solar energy, methane.
I'll stick with the 1979 Ironhead Harley, it conveys me from place to place in style, and re-seals the driveway when I get home!
(That means it leaks oil)