Downtown Austin
What If the Problem Isn't the Liberals?
RECEIVED Fri., March 12, 2010
Dear Editor,
Re: Patrick Reck's letter “What Is the Most Effective Language?” [“Postmarks,” March 12]: The amendment process is supposed to be difficult but not impossible. Yet it would seem amendments are made on a fairly regular basis by those wacky judicial “activists” who “legislate from the bench.” It is my contention that, despite the endless right-wing evangelical Republican conservative propaganda about liberals, it is in fact conservatives who hate this country and the majority of its people, and this is easily proven by their approach to constitutional amendments. In short, every conservative-backed amendment proposed (in some cases passed) in the last 30 years has been in favor of restricting civil rights or liberties. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly rendered decisions over the past decade (and longer) against democracy and the civil rights/liberties of the people and in favor of corporations. Also as usual, addressing the root issue again gets clouded, which is how the political system in this country is financed to begin with. My own preference would be for named (not anonymous) individuals to contribute as much as desired (all contributions posted in a timely fashion), but based on claimed residence for voting purposes or claimed residence within the U.S. For example, if I live in Liberty Hill, Williamson County, Texas, I could contribute in unlimited fashion to city, county, and state legislative districts where I reside (but not outside) and statewide issues/candidates and to representatives to Congress from my district of residence (but not outside), likewise for president/vice president (that being a nationwide office) – however, I would be prohibited in supporting candidates/issues outside of my state/county/city/districts of representation with the exception of my personal time – I couldn't give money to an outside campaign, but I could go personally and act as a campaign worker, for example. Again, it should be about actual people, and it should be about noninterference from outside entities.
Re: Patrick Reck's letter “What Is the Most Effective Language?” [“Postmarks,” March 12]: The amendment process is supposed to be difficult but not impossible. Yet it would seem amendments are made on a fairly regular basis by those wacky judicial “activists” who “legislate from the bench.” It is my contention that, despite the endless right-wing evangelical Republican conservative propaganda about liberals, it is in fact conservatives who hate this country and the majority of its people, and this is easily proven by their approach to constitutional amendments. In short, every conservative-backed amendment proposed (in some cases passed) in the last 30 years has been in favor of restricting civil rights or liberties. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly rendered decisions over the past decade (and longer) against democracy and the civil rights/liberties of the people and in favor of corporations. Also as usual, addressing the root issue again gets clouded, which is how the political system in this country is financed to begin with. My own preference would be for named (not anonymous) individuals to contribute as much as desired (all contributions posted in a timely fashion), but based on claimed residence for voting purposes or claimed residence within the U.S. For example, if I live in Liberty Hill, Williamson County, Texas, I could contribute in unlimited fashion to city, county, and state legislative districts where I reside (but not outside) and statewide issues/candidates and to representatives to Congress from my district of residence (but not outside), likewise for president/vice president (that being a nationwide office) – however, I would be prohibited in supporting candidates/issues outside of my state/county/city/districts of representation with the exception of my personal time – I couldn't give money to an outside campaign, but I could go personally and act as a campaign worker, for example. Again, it should be about actual people, and it should be about noninterference from outside entities.
Daniel Lea