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

Sun Aug 28 00:24:40 PDT 2011

I can't provide definitive answers, but ...

Some comments below ...

Spencer Graves wrote:
> 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.
>

Going back 100 or 150 years ago, I would guess that
few would have seen the need for a constitutional
amendment for this issue.

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

We have been seeing the disenfranchisement of people in
Florida and Ohio (and other states as well, I think).

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

A few cities and towns have passed resolutions to the
effect that corporations are not people and should not
be treated as such, and the corporations have sued saying
that those cities and towns were not allowed to do so.
I don't know the outcome of the suits.

>
> 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

I have not heard anything about a constitutional
convention.  I suggest you all attend David Cobb's talk
in Palo Alto, and ask your questions there.  As I
understand it, 7-8 is for Cobb to talk, partly about
history, partly about other stuff, then 8-9 is for Q & A.

Gerry

>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss