Your Legislators: Constitutional Amendments (April 3, 2014)


>>NOT A LOT THAT I HAVE HEARD
TALKED ABOUT, NO.   TALKED ABOUT, NO.
>>WHAT ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL  >>WHAT ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS?   AMENDMENTS?
WE HAVE ONE QUESTION ALREADY AS   WE HAVE ONE QUESTION ALREADY AS
I UNDERSTAND IT, HAVING TO DO   I UNDERSTAND IT, HAVING TO DO
WITH LEGISLATIVE COMPENSATION IF   WITH LEGISLATIVE COMPENSATION IF
I’M RECALLING CORRECTLY, AND   I’M RECALLING CORRECTLY, AND
CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG, ARE   CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG, ARE
THERE ANY OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL   THERE ANY OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS THAT MIGHT PASS   AMENDMENTS THAT MIGHT PASS
LEGISLATURE TO GO ON THE BALLOT   LEGISLATURE TO GO ON THE BALLOT
IN NOVEMBER?   IN NOVEMBER?
SENATOR THOMPSON, LET’S START   SENATOR THOMPSON, LET’S START
WITH YOU.   WITH YOU.
>>I HAVEN’T HEARD ABOUT  >>I HAVEN’T HEARD ABOUT
THEM-THAN THE POTENTIAL   THEM-THAN THE POTENTIAL
INFLATER, AND KENT SAYS IT’S OFF   INFLATER, AND KENT SAYS IT’S OFF
THE TABLE.   THE TABLE.
THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE   THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE
THINGS THAT DOESN’T EVEN REQUIRE   THINGS THAT DOESN’T EVEN REQUIRE
THE GOVERNOR’S SIGNATURE, AND   THE GOVERNOR’S SIGNATURE, AND
IT’S A MATTER OF THE MAJORITY   IT’S A MATTER OF THE MAJORITY
PASSING THEM, AND IT’S KIND OF   PASSING THEM, AND IT’S KIND OF
IN THE HANDS OF THE MAJORITY,   IN THE HANDS OF THE MAJORITY,
AND I HAVEN’T HEARD A LOT OF   AND I HAVEN’T HEARD A LOT OF
TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.   TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.
>>AND THE MINIMUM WAGE  >>AND THE MINIMUM WAGE
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT DIDN’T   CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT DIDN’T
SAY IT’S OFF THE TABLE, BUT I   SAY IT’S OFF THE TABLE, BUT I
DON’T THINK IT’S PROBABLY GOING   DON’T THINK IT’S PROBABLY GOING
TO GO T THIS YEAR.   TO GO T THIS YEAR.
AS FAR AS OTHER AMENDMENTS,   AS FAR AS OTHER AMENDMENTS,
SENATOR BACH IS CARRYING A   SENATOR BACH IS CARRYING A
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AS YOU   CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AS YOU
MENTIONED SENATOR THOMPSON, THAT   MENTIONED SENATOR THOMPSON, THAT
WOULD REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY TO   WOULD REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY TO
PASS THE CONSTITUTIONAL   PASS THE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT BEFORE IT COULD BE PUT   AMENDMENT BEFORE IT COULD BE PUT
ON THE BALLOT.   ON THE BALLOT.
YOU MENTIONED, ALSO, THE   YOU MENTIONED, ALSO, THE
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT IS   CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT IS
GOING TO GO ON THE BALLOT.   GOING TO GO ON THE BALLOT.
HOWEVER, IT’S NOT GOING ON THE   HOWEVER, IT’S NOT GOING ON THE
BALLOT THIS YEAR.   BALLOT THIS YEAR.
BUT IT’S GOING TO BE GOING ON   BUT IT’S GOING TO BE GOING ON
THE BALLOT IN 2016.   THE BALLOT IN 2016.
THAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL   THAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REMOVE THE   AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REMOVE THE
POWER OF LAWMAKERS TO SET THEIR   POWER OF LAWMAKERS TO SET THEIR
OWN PAY, AND TO TURN THAT POWER   OWN PAY, AND TO TURN THAT POWER
OVER TO A CITIZENS ONLY COUNCIL   OVER TO A CITIZENS ONLY COUNCIL
THAT’S APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR   THAT’S APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR
AND CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME   AND CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME
COURT, AND IT WOULD BE   COURT, AND IT WOULD BE
GEOGRAPHICALLY BALANCED AND   GEOGRAPHICALLY BALANCED AND
POLITICALLY BALANCED, AND IT   POLITICALLY BALANCED, AND IT
WOULD BE CITIZENS ONLY.   WOULD BE CITIZENS ONLY.
THERE WOULD BE NO LEGISLATORS,   THERE WOULD BE NO LEGISLATORS,
NO SPOUSES OF L LEGISLATORS, AND   NO SPOUSES OF L LEGISLATORS, AND
NO LOBBYISTS OR FORMER LOBBYISTS   NO LOBBYISTS OR FORMER LOBBYISTS
TO REMOVE ALL CONFLICT OF   TO REMOVE ALL CONFLICT OF
INTEREST, AND THAT’S THE REASON   INTEREST, AND THAT’S THE REASON
THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.   THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
>>TRY TO REMOVE THE CONFLICT OF  >>TRY TO REMOVE THE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST THERE.   INTEREST THERE.
>>DO THEY BAN LAWYERS, TOO?  >>DO THEY BAN LAWYERS, TOO?
>>STILL ON THERE.  >>STILL ON THERE.
THAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL   THAT’S THE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT I AUTHORED.   AMENDMENT I AUTHORED.
IT’S GOING ON THE BALLOT IN  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *