|
Post by craigwood on Jun 16, 2012 1:36:45 GMT -5
Read our Petitions and Post Your Response for Access by All.
Grievance: The 1st amendment protects our rights to assemble and sign petitions to redress grievances, but our government has adopted procedures, policies and principles of law to prevent receiving, responding to and redressing our pleas. Thus our petitions are ignored without this redress support. Redress: A constitutional government shall establish an internet posting board for petitions with supporting documents open to all. Posting board shall show each petition it’s posting date, its subject index and tag words selected by the petitioner(s) -- each elected servant shall have a reserved space in state/district order with each petition to acknowledge their review date, any response and any actions taken for the redress. Complaint Examples: Non persons: corporations, even foreign governments, etc., can access every elected servant by hiring agents; but we the natural born persons find that congress has setup their computers to block communications with the elected not in our home’s district. Peaceful assemblies in public places by persons exercising their free speech to redress complaints have been assailed. Where wealth purchased speech in the public’s airways can suggest/advocate violence without reprimands or rebuttals. The public’s contract with and faith in its government for our constitutional rights is being breached.
|
|
|
Post by maureenmower on Jun 16, 2012 1:45:22 GMT -5
I would also suggest that you follow the following format:
1 - State the grievance (complaint) and perhaps an example of how it harms Americans.
2 - State proposed redress solutions.
I suggest this because I noted a couple of items where the "grievance" was a list of proposed solutions with no actual "grievance" (complaint) listed, nor any explanation of how the current status is harming Americans.
We need both. Solution ideas are great, but you have to state the problem first.
|
|
|
Post by tonydestefanis on Jun 16, 2012 9:52:11 GMT -5
I don't have time to research right now but I believe limitations on direct petitions to congress were implemented in the 1800's in response to numerous anti-slavery petitions that were presented. I think the house put in place a rule or procedure that the do not have to hear or entertain such petitions. However, my questions is why don't our current representatives take suggestions and present the issues that are of real concern to their constituents and try to have the legislature address them. I fear the answer is that instead of heeding concern from actual people the issues they are concerned with are the ones presented to them by lobbyists who spin the things that will benefits some special interest as being things in the interest of the American people. Congress relies on lobbyists and special interests to define the problems instead of looking to the people. If congress was not so corrupted by the influence of special interest money they would do their jobs and look out for the interests of their constituants making the need for direct petitions from citizens less urgent because we would have a voice, through our representatives. Unfortunately, our voices get drowned out by those who have more money to spend.
|
|
|
Post by maureenmower on Jun 16, 2012 10:12:51 GMT -5
I agree, Tony... every time I hear John Boehner say "the people want..." I want to slap the tan right off his face, because what inevitably follows those words are what he and his ideologically compatible friends want. He doesn't know or care what the REAL "American people" want. He just uses the term to justify whatever it is HE wants.
The only time he ever says something true in that context, like when he says "The American people want jobs", it's never about any legislation that he and his GOP allies are pushing. No, he only uses that one when they are standing opposed to something Obama or the Dems are trying to get done.
But when Boehner wants institute government regulation of a woman's vagina, then it doesn't matter that the American people want jobs, and it doesn't matter that they DON'T want to revisit or re-argue the case for reproductive choice - because his GOP allies want it, and they are the only "American people" he listens to.
It's like that Westboro church bunch that run around protesting at soldier funerals. They claim that "God Hates ****" (purposely not using the word, since it's derogatory) - but what they really mean is THEY "hate" that particular segment of society, not God.
|
|