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

Sat Aug 27 23:42:34 PDT 2011

A constitutional convention was not mentioned in any material that I read.  However, for the people to amend the constitution, as opposed to just the Congress, a convention would be a logical choice.  As I said before, a convention would likely be hijacked by corporate interests.  I would also question the origin of the third point in the proposed amendment.  Did this arrive before or after the proposal to work with the Tea Party?

John Thielking

From: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
To: John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
Cc: Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net>; "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Move To Amend and the Tea Party

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).  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 
>_______________________________________________
>sosfbay-discuss mailing list
>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/d1213784/attachment.html>