Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't understand the temporary nature of proposed Constitutional Amendment?
"Section 6. Application and duration of certain redistricting amendments.
The authorization in Article II, Section 6 authorizing the General Assembly to modify one or more congressional districts at any point following adoption of a decennial reapportionment law in the event that any State of the United States of America conducts a redistricting of such state's congressional districts at any point following that state's adoption of a decennial reapportionment law shall be limited to making such modifications between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030, in response to actions taken by another state between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030."
I'm not questioning why Democrats want it to be temporary but wondering if there's a precedent for time-limited provisions in a State Constitution. It strikes me as strange.
California did the same thing. It’s strange because it’s a response to the President ordering Texas to redistrict mid-decade, which is also strange.
California, Illinois, Massachusetts and others did this long, long ago.
Anonymous wrote:I thought libs were against gerrymandering as it is anti-democrwtic or something.
Smells like hypocrisy.
Anonymous wrote:It’s sad and the districts are truly stupid but Trump and obedient republicans forced us into this madness. We cannot be principled while they thrash democracy. I applaud the temporary nature of this and hope that we can return to democratic norms when the trump era is over.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't understand the temporary nature of proposed Constitutional Amendment?
"Section 6. Application and duration of certain redistricting amendments.
The authorization in Article II, Section 6 authorizing the General Assembly to modify one or more congressional districts at any point following adoption of a decennial reapportionment law in the event that any State of the United States of America conducts a redistricting of such state's congressional districts at any point following that state's adoption of a decennial reapportionment law shall be limited to making such modifications between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030, in response to actions taken by another state between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030."
I'm not questioning why Democrats want it to be temporary but wondering if there's a precedent for time-limited provisions in a State Constitution. It strikes me as strange.
California did the same thing. It’s strange because it’s a response to the President ordering Texas to redistrict mid-decade, which is also strange.
Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't understand the temporary nature of proposed Constitutional Amendment?
"Section 6. Application and duration of certain redistricting amendments.
The authorization in Article II, Section 6 authorizing the General Assembly to modify one or more congressional districts at any point following adoption of a decennial reapportionment law in the event that any State of the United States of America conducts a redistricting of such state's congressional districts at any point following that state's adoption of a decennial reapportionment law shall be limited to making such modifications between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030, in response to actions taken by another state between January 1, 2025, and October 31, 2030."
I'm not questioning why Democrats want it to be temporary but wondering if there's a precedent for time-limited provisions in a State Constitution. It strikes me as strange.
Anonymous wrote:I thought libs were against gerrymandering as it is anti-democrwtic or something.
Smells like hypocrisy.