Referendum on a European constitution
Wallace-Macpherson
European constitution.
In Great Britain and N. Ireland there is no effective procedure by which
citizens can propose a law or trigger a referendum.
========================================
A new constitution is being negotiated and MPs will decide whether the
UK accepts it. Do you think the final decision should be put to a
referendum of the British people?
http://www.femail.co.uk/pages/news/referendum.html?in_page_id=2
========================================
Wallace-Macpherson
Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R
http://www.iniref.org
Diversity Isn't A Codeword For Anti-White
because Tony Blair and his friends disagree with it and we all know the left's
main tenet is 'democracy'.
"Wallace-Macpherson" <m...@NO.SPAM.iniref.org> wrote in message
news:3EE855DC...@NO.SPAM.iniref.org...
Mike CJ
news:3EE855DC...@NO.SPAM.iniref.org...
with his point of view.
Mike.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.489 / Virus Database: 288 - Release Date: 10-Jun-03
Wallace-Macpherson
> "Wallace-Macpherson" <m...@NO.SPAM.iniref.org> wrote in message
> news:3EE855DC...@NO.SPAM.iniref.org...
> > Here's the Daily Mail's question concerning a possible referendum on a
> > European constitution.
> >
> > In Great Britain and N. Ireland there is no effective procedure by which
> > citizens can propose a law or trigger a referendum.
> >
> > ========================================
> >
> > A new constitution is being negotiated and MPs will decide whether the
> > UK accepts it. Do you think the final decision should be put to a
> > referendum of the British people?
> >
> > http://www.femail.co.uk/pages/news/referendum.html?in_page_id=2
> >
> >
> > ========================================
> >
> > Wallace-Macpherson
> > Citizens' Initiative and Referendum I&R
> > http://www.iniref.org
> >
> Of course, Blair only regards referendums as valuable if they end up agreeing
> with his point of view.
> Mike.
Governing politicians are said to sometimes call referendums in order to avoid
taking a decision on a sticky question, an attempt to avoid becoming less
popular. Does anyone have examples of this?
Wallace-Macpherson
Wm James
wrote:
The Mississippi stae flag issue.
The Tennessee lottery.
Both were settled by referendum because the politicians wouldn't touch
it. Also, California has regular cases on the ballots.
William R. James
vonroach
>>Governing politicians are said to sometimes call referendums in order to avoid
>>taking a decision on a sticky question, an attempt to avoid becoming less
>>popular. Does anyone have examples of this?
>>
>>Wallace-Macpherson
>>
>
>
>The Mississippi stae flag issue.
>The Tennessee lottery.
>
>Both were settled by referendum because the politicians wouldn't touch
>it. Also, California has regular cases on the ballots.
>
>William R. James
Yes, Willy, those are a few examples. Parimutuel betting in Texas. There are
always about 10 or more referendum questions at the end of the ballot on
subjects like State Constitutional Amendments, bond issues, etc. A type of
referendum is being conducted as we speak, where a petition requiring 900,000
registered voters signatures is being circulated with the objective of
unseating the Governor - Gray Davis. Arnold Schwartznegger is watching this
recall and deciding if he will run for Governor.
Wallace-Macpherson
This is interesting stuff but not quite what I asked, folks. It seems that what you
are telling us about are citizens' initiatives, something almost entirely unknown
in GB+NI.
The question (trimmed) was:
>>Governing politicians (...) sometimes call referendums in order to avoid
>>taking a decision on a sticky question (...). Does anyone have examples of this?
Regards
Wm James
wrote:
Well what else are you looking for? The Mississippi flag case is a
perfect example of exactly what you said. The Confederate battle flag
was incorporated into the stat flag around the end of the 19th
century. In the 50s and 60s some other states did likewise in protest
of the civil rights laws. Now the flag has become politically
incorrect because of that and whiners have demanded it be changed for
years. The politicians were stuck in the middle. If they voted to
change it, the majority would throw them out of office, but if they
voted against changing it, the media would grill them every day from
then on. So the politicians decided to put it on the ballot. I think
they and the media thought the people would vote to change the flag,
but an interesting thing happened. Even the blacks voted to keep the
flag as is. It seems they aren't offended by it in spite of the left
wing media telling them they are supposed to be offended for years.
Anyway, the politicians are off the hook. They avoided making the
decision, and they can blame the people every time the media starts
whining about it.
William R. James
vonroach
>This is interesting stuff but not quite what I asked, folks. It seems that what you
>are telling us about are citizens' initiatives, something almost entirely unknown
>in GB+NI.
quibbling over terms.
Wallace-Macpherson
*snip*
Thanks for clarifying. "Mississippi flag case" is an accurate example. It was not a
citizens' initiative: "the politicians decided to put it on the ballot".
Wallace-Macpherson
There are important differences here. One the one hand we have plebiscite or referendum
called from "above" by ruling politicians. On the other hand are citizens' actions such
as law proposal, ballot initiative and citizen-initiated referendum. The latter, IMO
desirable, forms of democracy, are unavailable and little known in Britain and N.
Ireland.
Wallace-Macpherson
Wm James
wrote:
Such ballot initiatives initiated by citizens is a good thing, but it
is also prone to problems if it is too easy. That's the problem with
democracy. Strict majority rule offers no protection, no power, not
even a voice to any minority view. The US is a constitutional
republic. When it was setup, only the house of representives had
democratic elections. That's one half of one of the three branches of
government. The senate was appointed byt the individual state's
gonernors, the courts appointed by the president for life, and the
president elected by the electoral college. Today the senate is
elected but the rest is still not democratically elected. And many
issues require super majorities to be passed as well. Constitutional
amendments are extremely difficult to pass requiring far more that a
mere democratic election.
Democracy sounds good, but in reality it is very VERY bad. Even the
majority should have to respect the freedom of others.
William R. James
vonroach
>Thanks for clarifying. "Mississippi flag case" is an accurate example. It was not a
>citizens' initiative: "the politicians decided to put it on the ballot".
No WM you still haven't got the picture. The politicians pressured by the Black
Extortionists of JJackson's rainbow coalition, NAACP et al , were forced to put
it on the ballot or have money and power extorted from them by the minorities
who have turned prejudice into a million dollar criminal enterprise. Their
accomplices in the ultra-liberal media fanned the flames. The only `citizens'
interested enough to vote were the minorities. A typical _mob action_ that many
of these `direct democratic moves produce.
vonroach
>. Today the senate is
>elected but the rest is still not democratically elected.
Still a bit off the mark. The members of the Electorial College,
Representatives, Senators are all elected. Same is true of State governors,
legislatures, and judges.
Wm James
wrote:
Judges are in some areas and not in others. But the electoral college
system does not make for a democratic process. There have been a
number of presidents elected with a minority of the vote, several
without even a plurality.
There are some elections in the US which are democratic, but the
nation is not a democracy.
William R. James
Wm James
wrote:
I agree with you, but that wasn't the question. The politicians
didn't want to touch it. That's why they put it up for a vote. MANY
blacks in the state support leaving the flag alone. It's more a part
of Mississippi history than any other state and the confederate battle
flag being added to the state flag had nothing whatsoever to do with
race. Also, since Mississippi never surrendered, it just seems
appropriate. That's right, Mississippi has yet to sign the surrender.
It comes up in the legislature periodically, but it has become such a
tradition that even black legislators vote against it.
William R. James
vonroach
>Also, since Mississippi never surrendered, it just seems
>appropriate. That's right, Mississippi has yet to sign the surrender.
>It comes up in the legislature periodically, but it has become such a
>tradition that even black legislators vote against it.
Good, cancel all the money the US sends to Mississippi and send that wishy-washy
Lott home.
Wm James
wrote:
We only elected him to get him to move to DC. :)
William R. James
Wallace-Macpherson
To date the following countries have announced that they will hold a
referendum on a european constitution: Denmark, France, Republic of
Ireland, Spain, Sweden (latter unconfirmed).
vonroach
wrote:
>19th June 2003
>
>To date the following countries have announced that they will hold a
>referendum on a european constitution: Denmark, France, Republic of
>Ireland, Spain, Sweden (latter unconfirmed).
>
This Trade Association has reached a grave crisis, one had better read the whole
document very closely before voting. Extensive debate should proceed any vote.
England should not agree without a full public debate and a national vote of the
citizens. This should not be left to any back room schemes in Parliament or
Number Ten. England has traveled the road with Germany and France before all the
way to Dunkirk.