Poll: Setting priorities

sangha · Nov 28, 2014

There has been some discussion about how we should go about tackling this immense task we have undertaken. Some think we should start with one thing, while others have suggested other things to attack first. Since I'm all about the consensus, I'm creating this poll to get a sense of what the membership believes should be our first priority, second priority etc. Choose the one thing you believe is the issue we should address first.

Please note:

1) Even though you are allowed only one choice in this poll, this does not mean we will only work on one thing at a time. We can begin by addressing whichever issue gets the most votes, and once that effort gets off the ground, we can start work on the 2nd issue and work on both (or more) in parallel.

2) This poll is non-binding. It is meant to inform both me, and all of us in general, of what the consensus is.

3) The choices are based on what I remember being suggested and discussed . If I left out something you have suggested, please don't take offense. Just choose "Other" and re-post your suggestion.

4) Feel free to post your thoughts about what you think about how we should proceed from here. This thread is meant to help us figure out the best way to proceed. All contributions will be appreciated (at least, by me)

Thank you

sangha · Nov 28, 2014

My vote, as a member and not the President, is that people want to get to work and will grow disinterested if we continue to debate rules and hold elections for officers.

29A · Nov 28, 2014

I voted Work on a Mission Statement/First Principles/Goals etc., specifically goals.

Is it a foregone conclusion that this convention's goal is to write a scratch document? Even if that's the object, it seems a discussion of the failures of the current Constitution would still be in order.

Gaius46 · Nov 28, 2014

29A said:
I voted Work on a Mission Statement/First Principles/Goals etc., specifically goals.

Is it a foregone conclusion that this convention's goal is to write a scratch document? Even if that's the object, it seems a discussion of the failures of the current Constitution would still be in order.

I think we have to start with a clean sheet of paper and come up with a document that reflects not only what we think we should be (first principals) but that also takes in consideration the flaws in the original document that the past 200 plus years have exposed.

sangha · Nov 28, 2014

29A said:
I voted Work on a Mission Statement/First Principles/Goals etc., specifically goals.

Is it a foregone conclusion that this convention's goal is to write a scratch document? Even if that's the object, it seems a discussion of the failures of the current Constitution would still be in order.

I have no objection to you (or anyone else) starting a thread on that (or any other) subject. In fact, I'd like to encourage it. It is not only relevant to this convention, it's appropriate for the forum in general.

And no, nothing is a foregone conclusion at this point. But we have to start somewhere so I thought I'd poll the members and see what they think

vasuderatorrent · Nov 30, 2014

Please give us your input so that we can start moving on this project.

29A said:
Yes

Agent J said:
Yes

AlbqOwl said:
Yes

Amandi said:
Yes

American said:
Yes

Americanwoman said:
Yes

Apacherat said:
Yes

azgreg said:
Yes

Beaudreaux (doesn't want to be contacted)

Bigfoot 88 said:
Yes

BrewerBob said:
Yes

Buck Ewer said:
Yes

Cardinal (doesn't want to be contacted)

Chantal said:
Yes

chromium said:
Yes

Citizen.Seven said:
Yes

CycloneWanderer said:
Yes

d0gbreath said:
Yes

DaveFagan said:
Yes

Declan said:
Yes

DifferentDrummr said:
Yes

EMNofSeattle said:
Yes

ernst barkmann said:
Yes

FreedomFromAll said:
Yes

Gaius46 said:
Yes

gdgyva said:
Yes

Geoist said:
Yes

Grand Mal said:
Yes

grip said:
Yes

hallam said:
Yes

Hamster Buddha said:
Yes

Hatuey said:
Yes

haymarket said:
Yes

iliveonramen said:
Yes

imagep said:
Yes

Jango said:
Yes

Jesse Booth said:
Yes

jet57 said:
Yes

jog said:
Yes

JP Hochbaum said:
Yes

Kal'Stang said:
Yes

Kobie said:
Yes

Korimyr the Rat said:
Yes

Kushinator said:
Yes

Lovebug said:
Yes

Luftwaffe said:
Yes

mak2 said:
Yes

ModerateGOP said:
Yes

Moot said:
Yes

Navy Pride said:
Yes

Nilly said:
Yes

NIMBY said:
Yes

Northern Light (doesn't want to participate)

Ockham said:
Yes

OrphanSlug said:
Yes

paddymcdougall said:
Yes

Paleocon said:
Yes

PirateMk1 said:
Yes

Poiuy said:
Yes

Psychoclown said:
Yes

rabbitcaebannog said:
Yes

radioman said:
Yes

RedAkston said:
Yes

Removable Mind said:
Yes

rjay said:
Yes

roguenuke said:
Yes

sangha said:
Yes

sookster said:
Yes

Superfly said:
Yes

TeleKat said:
Yes

The Mark said:
Yes

TheDemSocialist said:
Yes

Threegoofs said:
Yes

tres borrachos (doesn't want to be contacted)

TurtleDude said:
Yes

Unitedwestand13 said:
Yes

unrepresented said:
Yes

US Conservative said:
Yes

vasuderatorrent said:
Yes

Visbek said:
Yes

whysoserious said:
Yes

Wiggen said:
Yes

Your Star said:
Yes

EMNofSeattle · Nov 30, 2014

Wouldn't a mission statement be a preamble? If yes we can work on a preamble, and make it the first clause in the outline phase.

We don't need more officers IMO, it's always fun to have an acting asst advisor to the undersecretary of the bureau of redundancy, but it's unneeded here. Additionally a position like sgt at arms is only useful if you have a physical crowd

IMO we need bylaws, and an outline with dates on when parts will be finished, to avoid threads, I think we also should establish committees for different parts of the convention. Otherwise we may have 5 different motions for like a constitutional right to abortion or bear arms, which will bog the project down

AlbqOwl · Nov 30, 2014

sangha said:
There has been some discussion about how we should go about tackling this immense task we have undertaken. Some think we should start with one thing, while others have suggested other things to attack first. Since I'm all about the consensus, I'm creating this poll to get a sense of what the membership believes should be our first priority, second priority etc. Choose the one thing you believe is the issue we should address first.

Please note:

1) Even though you are allowed only one choice in this poll, this does not mean we will only work on one thing at a time. We can begin by addressing whichever issue gets the most votes, and once that effort gets off the ground, we can start work on the 2nd issue and work on both (or more) in parallel.

2) This poll is non-binding. It is meant to inform both me, and all of us in general, of what the consensus is.

3) The choices are based on what I remember being suggested and discussed . If I left out something you have suggested, please don't take offense. Just choose "Other" and re-post your suggestion.

4) Feel free to post your thoughts about what you think about how we should proceed from here. This thread is meant to help us figure out the best way to proceed. All contributions will be appreciated (at least, by me)

Thank you

A Constitution begins with a Preamble that I suppose is a 'mission statement' of sorts. What is it that we want the Constitution to accomplish?

The existing Preamble would of course be updated to more modern language, but otherwise would be difficult to improve on:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We should start with a Preamble and make sure every aspect of the articles and clauses that follow it are compatible with it.

In fact, I think if we start off with a blank page and try to create a Constitution from scratch, we'll be bogged down in what should go into it from the get go and will never get to the meat. The existing Constitution is already in usable form. Why not use it as a guide for the content and go from there?

Nilly · Nov 30, 2014

Yep goals and mission statement needs to be put forward just to make sure that everyone is on the same page, I would think within this step we coul could start to lay out the processes and rules for how this would work. As far as a mission statement, it only has to be written by the president as an official summary/preamble of what we're doing and could jut say something along the lines of "The goal is to create a document with numerous clauses which describe the function, limitations and processes of the self governance of the fictional country of Sanghaland, where each clause will be decided via the democratic process of proposal -> debate -> review/approval/vote". Possibly followed by some rules.

We should be able to then fairly quickly approve it (or contest it in places, such as the name of the country :2razz

This will put everyone on the same page, and we can iron out any fundamental issues people have that are process and outline related rather than issues pertaining to the discussion of each clause in and of itself.

paddymcdougall · Nov 30, 2014

Just to be contrarian - "united states of america" - do we want a states model?

US Conservative · Nov 30, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
A Constitution begins with a Preamble that I suppose is a 'mission statement' of sorts. What is it that we want the Constitution to accomplish?

The existing Preamble would of course be updated to more modern language, but otherwise would be difficult to improve on:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We should start with a Preamble and make sure every aspect of the articles and clauses that follow it are compatible with it.

In fact, I think if we start off with a blank page and try to create a Constitution from scratch, we'll be bogged down in what should go into it from the get go and will never get to the meat. The existing Constitution is already in usable form. Why not use it as a guide for the content and go from there?

Sounds good, as frankly COTUS is a good starting point, and would hopefully expedite things in this convention. Its taking way too long.

US Conservative · Nov 30, 2014

paddymcdougall said:
Just to be contrarian - "united states of america" - do we want a states model?

The more diffuse from a centralized govt, the better.

vasuderatorrent · Nov 30, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
A Constitution begins with a Preamble that I suppose is a 'mission statement' of sorts. What is it that we want the Constitution to accomplish?

The existing Preamble would of course be updated to more modern language, but otherwise would be difficult to improve on:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We should start with a Preamble and make sure every aspect of the articles and clauses that follow it are compatible with it.

In fact, I think if we start off with a blank page and try to create a Constitution from scratch, we'll be bogged down in what should go into it from the get go and will never get to the meat. The existing Constitution is already in usable form. Why not use it as a guide for the content and go from there?

Jump on it. Start an unofficial thread.

Grand Mal · Nov 30, 2014

I voted 'mission statement' but I think of it as a 'scope of work'. We need to decide what we want to accomplish in which areas- in other words, what should a constitution do? Limit or define the powers of the levels of gov't, outline the roles of the levels of authority, get specific about laws or just state broad definitions of 'inalienable rights' and leave the nuts and bolts to the legislative bodies. If it's a constitution of 'united states' do we even have authority to meddle? Obviously we've decided we have so should we first define the limits of our authority?
Next, committees.

AlbqOwl · Nov 30, 2014

Grand Mal said:
I voted 'mission statement' but I think of it as a 'scope of work'. We need to decide what we want to accomplish in which areas- in other words, what should a constitution do? Limit or define the powers of the levels of gov't, outline the roles of the levels of authority, get specific about laws or just state broad definitions of 'inalienable rights' and leave the nuts and bolts to the legislative bodies. If it's a constitution of 'united states' do we even have authority to meddle? Obviously we've decided we have so should we first define the limits of our authority?
Next, committees.

But that is what the debates should decide I think. The small government people are going to see that very differently than will the statists who favor much more control given to the central government. We are all much more polarized in our individual points of view than were the Founders. Unless we take it in very small bites, we will have a tough time setting a single objective much less an actual goal. Look how complicated it became just electing a President and Secretary of the Convention.

And we haven't yet agreed whether we will use the existing Constitution as the general format for a new one.

I would be happy to write a proposed Preamble, subject to input, debate, and amendment followed by a final vote. But I cannot do that on the authority of the Secretary alone.

SUGGESTION: Would it be possible for Admin to create a sub-forum for a proposed new Constitution? And then as we come to an official agreement on each article, sticky it so we can find it again?

sangha · Nov 30, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
SUGGESTION: Would it be possible for Admin to create a sub-forum for a proposed new Constitution? And then as we come to an official agreement on each article, sticky it so we can find it again?

Actually, this thread has been moved into a new sub-forum that the admins created especially for our convention.

As far as sticky-ing threads, I don't think that will be a problem.

AlbqOwl · Nov 30, 2014

Ah so they did. I should have looked.

US Conservative · Nov 30, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
But that is what the debates should decide I think. The small government people are going to see that very differently than will the statists who favor much more control given to the central government. We are all much more polarized in our individual points of view than were the Founders. Unless we take it in very small bites, we will have a tough time setting a single objective much less an actual goal. Look how complicated it became just electing a President and Secretary of the Convention.

And we haven't yet agreed whether we will use the existing Constitution as the general format for a new one.

I would be happy to write a proposed Preamble, subject to input, debate, and amendment followed by a final vote. But I cannot do that on the authority of the Secretary alone.

SUGGESTION: Would it be possible for Admin to create a sub-forum for a proposed new Constitution? And then as we come to an official agreement on each article, sticky it so we can find it again?

I'd love to see your preamble, look forward to it.

Grand Mal · Nov 30, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
But that is what the debates should decide I think. The small government people are going to see that very differently than will the statists who favor much more control given to the central government. We are all much more polarized in our individual points of view than were the Founders. Unless we take it in very small bites, we will have a tough time setting a single objective much less an actual goal. Look how complicated it became just electing a President and Secretary of the Convention.

Yes, the opposition to the founders viewpoint didn't attend the discussions but also there's less urgency about the process here. I don't foresee this becoming mired in partisanship.

AlbqOwl said:
And we haven't yet agreed whether we will use the existing Constitution as the general format for a new one.

I say no. The original was written on paper made 250 years ago. Let's pretend it doesn't exist.

AlbqOwl said:
I would be happy to write a proposed Preamble, subject to input, debate, and amendment followed by a final vote. But I cannot do that on the authority of the Secretary alone.

SUGGESTION: Would it be possible for Admin to create a sub-forum for a proposed new Constitution? And then as we come to an official agreement on each article, sticky it so we can find it again?

paddymcdougall · Nov 30, 2014

US Conservative said:
The more diffuse from a centralized govt, the better.

And on many issues, I would disagree. Should be a fun discussion!

sangha · Nov 30, 2014

paddymcdougall said:
And on many issues, I would disagree. Should be a fun discussion!

Not that we have to do what the Framers did, but I will note that they were not in agreement concerning a centralized govt either. Some wanted a strong centralized federal govt, while others wanted the opposite. Yet somehow, they managed to forge a constitution.

Jango · Nov 30, 2014

Grand Mal said:
I voted 'mission statement' but I think of it as a 'scope of work'. We need to decide what we want to accomplish in which areas- in other words, what should a constitution do? Limit or define the powers of the levels of gov't, outline the roles of the levels of authority, get specific about laws or just state broad definitions of 'inalienable rights' and leave the nuts and bolts to the legislative bodies. If it's a constitution of 'united states' do we even have authority to meddle? Obviously we've decided we have so should we first define the limits of our authority?
Next, committees.

Yeah, pretty much where I'm at too. Thanks for doing the write-up for me, man

AlbqOwl · Dec 1, 2014

Grand Mal said:
Yes, the opposition to the founders viewpoint didn't attend the discussions but also there's less urgency about the process here. I don't foresee this becoming mired in partisanship.

I say no. The original was written on paper made 250 years ago. Let's pretend it doesn't exist.

And I think it would be extremely foolish to discard more than 200 years of experience with the existing Constitution and pretend that it doesn't exist. So we already have a point of disagreement. LOL.

paddymcdougall · Dec 1, 2014

AlbqOwl said:
And I think it would be extremely foolish to discard more than 200 years of experience with the existing Constitution and pretend that it doesn't exist. So we already have a point of disagreement. LOL.

I think we can use the experience without taking it as a draft document.

AlbqOwl · Dec 1, 2014

paddymcdougall said:
I think we can use the experience without taking it as a draft document.

I don't think we need to use it as a draft document so much as a guideline for how to design an efficient and effective Constitution. I happen to be a Constitutional originalist and want the Constitution to be read, interpreted, and enforced according to original intent. I believe the original intent is what made America the great nation that it is and the principles behind it are just as valid today as they ever were.

Certainly we won't include some clauses that have been made irrelevant by necessary amendments, and we will be able to include some concepts that the Founders had to leave out in order to arrive at consensus of a document all could live with. It took them eleven long years to accomplish an imperfect but completely functional document that did survive all efforts to thwart it for more than 100 years.

My preference on this is that we preserve what has worked and proved itself to be of value and importance in the interest of protecting life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and improve on what has been less effective in accomplishing that.

Poll: Setting priorities

What should our first priority be?

Work on a set of rules for the convention

Work on an outline for the constitution

Work on the actual constitution (skip writing an outline)

elect additional officers (ex Sgt at Arms, Parliamentarian, etc)

Work on a Mission Statement/First Principles/Goals etc

Other (please explain)

sangha

sangha

29A

Active member

Gaius46

sangha

vasuderatorrent

EMNofSeattle

No Russian ever called me deplorable

AlbqOwl

Nilly

stb

paddymcdougall

US Conservative

US Conservative

vasuderatorrent

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!

AlbqOwl

sangha

AlbqOwl

US Conservative

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!

paddymcdougall

sangha

Jango

AlbqOwl

paddymcdougall

AlbqOwl