It has come to my attention that some people said that the constitutional convention thought of maybe possibly probably adding a monarch to the DoR. I think that this is an undemocratic idea which will only add turmoil to an already unstable system. We already struggle electing a president, imagine the hell that would be if we had to choose a monarch. Also, I have always and will always be against a second house. The Senate is already competent enough and the President a strong enough counter power that a second house would be unnecessary. Also, fuck land-voting and gerrymandering. These ideas are antidemocratic and goes against direct democracy, which is the main objective of the new LIFE PACT.
TL;DR: This is a motion against a second house, a monarch and electoral boundaries, which will always lead to Gerrymandering.
If you agree with me, sign this letter to the constitutional convention against: - Monarchy, - A second house, - Electoral subdivisions.
u/AltDetom555555b, out! 👍
I get monarchy, but why the other two?
Some people have considered adding a second house, which would only slow down the democratic process while its potential powers are already well managed by the Senate and the President
And even if we ever get a second house, this would likely mean a different voting method than the first, and the only way that I can think of to make it different than the current system is to make electoral subdivisions, which could lead to gerrymandering, which, if you know US politics, is very, VERY bad.
That's what regions and cities are for. We'd just need to split it according to population.
If y'all are just gonna throw a monarch into the mix, then I can pack up shop right now and quit with the "quietly sown seeds of discord under guise of nonsense," shtick I've got goin' on because at that point you're just doing it to yourselves.
With love,
The Consortium 🫶🏻