Another Better Article on ConCon

Last evening’s article on this topic of holding a convention gives a bit more of an explanation why past attempts fell short of actually having a convention.

Here’s the key (paraphrased): most voters select the candidates they wish to vote for, but skip the bottom ballot where questions may be. So, as an example, if statewide 5,000,000 vote and only 5,000 of them answer the ballot question then the definition of a majority is not considering those who voted on just that ballot question but all ballots. In short, 5,000 out of 5,000,000 is not a majority.

Here is where the voting public needs to understand how important it is to answer/vote on everything that appears on the ballot come November. Leave nothing unanswered.

Particularly if you feel strongly about needing to have new legislation by way of this Constitutional Convention.

Do you feel the need for voter referendums on local/statewide issues?
Do you feel Maryland needs a recall mechanism/process for elected officials?
Do you feel it is necessary for elected officials to have terms limited?
Do you feel we need to be a Shall Issue (instead of May) state when it comes to applying for concealed carry permits?
Do you feel we need to provide photo ID when voting?
Speed cameras??

If you believe we need any of the above (or other issues) then remember to vote your entire ballot come November 2, 2010.

Here is another article on the subject published today by the Baltimore Sun. Although I feel the need to explain (in case you don’t know) that a constitution is never ‘shredded’ and started from scratch. Any constitutional changes made always show everything that has been written within it. Recent amendments that affect prior amendments do not erase or remove anything that has been written into the document. Just to be clear, and that everyone understands how this is done.

2 Responses

  1. Do you plan to keep this site updated? I sure hope so… its great!

    • The idea here is to post articles/issues pertaining to Maryland that could lead to a need to say we may need to hold a Constitutional Convention to bring about amendments to improve our laws for the betterment of the state residents.

      Short answer, yes, I intend to update this site as I find such related stories/articles/ events that cry out for proper justice and/or legal means to right a wrong (or many).

      If you, or anyone else, comes upon such a story – I would hope you would consider passing it along to me through the contact page so it can be added to the posts.

      For example, no knock raids that go wrong resulting in unnecessary harm or fatality. Correcting for law-abiding citizenry to allow for their self-defense by firearm if necessary, castle doctrine law for the state, may issue for law-abiding to apply and obtain concealed carry permits (CCW). Tort reform involving medical costs/ lawsuits and caps on awards. Term limits for all elected positions. And so on. Are speed and red-light cameras effective (stories throughout the country indicate locales are eliminating them as they do not enhance safety and also are not returning enough revenue to offset operating and installation costs.

      I am sure there are more examples.

      The clock is ticking towards November 2, 210 to see how the public will answer this 20 year question of “Do you want to have a Constitutional Convention?”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: