| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida's Constitution |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 10/20/08 11:43:05 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've ranted about it a few times.
Now Robb is having a go.
I believe, just like everyone else, that a constitution must be changeable. However, we must be careful not to let mob rule replace the tempering effect of a representative democracy.
There are things that simply do not belong in a state constitution. The Constitution was designed both as an anchor and as a set of guidelines to protect against "tyranny of the majority". Ironically enough, even though the constitution is amended capriciously every election, once something has been added, it is nearly impossible to repeal. State laws, on the other hand, are meant to ebb and flow with the whims of the populace because laws can be easily repealed or modified when needed.
It seems that these days, any time the state legislature fails to pass a law that has some degree of popular support, an amendment is added to the state constitution. It seems to me, instead of mucking up the state's charter and foundation with rules about which portions of preservation lands can be taxed, the people would be better served removing their representatives from office.
It is easy to sell many of these changes, because the content of the amendment sounds like a Good Idea(TM). People will vote based on how good the content sounds, rather than whether or not it is even a constitutional issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "Political Double-Negatives" | | "QoTD: Making PETA Look Sane" > |
|
|
|
|
