[GPSCC-chat] Move To Amend and the Tea Party

[Spencer Graves]

Hi, John, et al.:


       The Move To Amend web site lists three items, of which only the 
first clearly needs constitutional attention:


             * Money is not speech and a corporation is not a person.


             * Guarantee the right to vote to natural persons, etc.


             * Protect local communities against illegitimate 
"preemption" actions by global, national, and state governments.


       Can anyone explain to me why the second and third bullets are 
here?  I'm with John:  Tampering with the latter two of these three 
could open the door to nice sounding changes that could be worse than 
the problems they are attempting to fix -- and could reduce the appeal 
of a proposed amendment making easier for big money to defeat it.


       However, I'm confused with John's talk of a constitutional 
convention:  Has Move To Amend suggested that?  I have not seen that.  
If it were proposed, I think it would be a bad idea.


       Spencer


On 8/27/2011 8:42 PM, John Thielking wrote:
> My objection is that we are even considering a Constitutional 
> Amendment that includes the third point in the proposed amendment.  
> Such an amendment would allow local fiefdoms to write their own 
> constitution and the national constitution could become largely 
> irrelevant.  This is a bludgeon to fix the problems caused by NAFTA 
> when a scalpel is what is needed.
>
> *From:* Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net>
> *To:* John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 27, 2011 6:52 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [GPSCC-chat] Move To Amend and the Tea Party
>
> I think your first objection is why we are going for a constitutional 
> amendment.
>
> *From:* John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
> *To:* Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>; Post South SF Bay 
> discuss <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
> *Sent:* Fri, August 26, 2011 10:53:00 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [GPSCC-chat] Move To Amend and the Tea Party
>
> I don't like the part of the move to amend that includes giving more 
> local control to cities and states. This would open the door for going 
> backwards on civil rights (Roe V Wade, Immigration, Desegregation) 
> because after the amendment is passed every little fiefdom will then 
> adopt their own version of civil rights law.  If local control of such 
> laws is upheld, we will end up with an avalanche of ALEC sponsored 
> local legislation that will set us back a century or more.  Not all 
> national laws are bad or sponsored by corporations and we should 
> remember that.  Getting the Tea Party involved is bad for the same 
> reason. They will surely push the local control amendment to further 
> their own agenda. The first two points to amend are good and we should 
> keep those.  Keep in mind that calling a constitutional convention in 
> our current political climate is highly dangerous because the 
> corporations will surely hijack it for their own ends, negating any 
> good things we might try to introduce. Good luck.
> John Thielking
>
> *From:* Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
> *To:* Post South SF Bay discuss <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 26, 2011 7:43 PM
> *Subject:* [GPSCC-chat] Move To Amend and the Tea Party
>
> Hello, All:
>
>
>       The Tea Party Patriots, Inc. [ a social welfare organization 
> organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code] 
> distributed an announcement for the August 12 Move to Amend NY Tour 
> event in Endicott, NY 
> (www.teapartypatriots.org/BlogPostView.aspx?id=d57555fb-c40b-4124-9f38-4866368f4f7f 
> <http://www.teapartypatriots.org/BlogPostView.aspx?id=d57555fb-c40b-4124-9f38-4866368f4f7f>).  
> The announcement says, "Information will be provided about the issue 
> and facilitate a discussion about local action in your area and in 
> communities across the United States to win the amendment campaign 
> through grassroots mobilization."
>
>
>       One blogger claims that Move To Amend leader David 'Cobb is 
> crossing ideological lines by teaming up with Tea Party members to 
> make this "move" a reality.'   
> (http://gdaeman.blogspot.com/2010/01/move-to-amend.html)
>
>
>       I suggest we try to contact a local Tea Party group to see if 
> they are interested in supporting in some way the Sept. 12 event.  The 
> Koch brothers, who reportedly are providing most of the financing for 
> the Tea Party, might not support Move To Amend, though I would not 
> rule that out either.  However if half the audience on Sept. 12 is 
> from the Tea Party, I think most would support the idea.  If some 
> corporation pays someone to try to disrupt the event, it could 
> backfire on them.
>
>
>       Spencer
>
>
> -- 
> Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
> President and Chief Technology Officer
> Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
> 751 Emerson Ct.
> San José, CA 95126
> ph:  408-655-4567
> web:www.structuremonitoring.com  <http://www.structuremonitoring.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org <mailto:sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss


-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Technology Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567
web:  www.structuremonitoring.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20110827/d3c6f225/attachment.html>