Hess Bid. I Don't Understand. Explanation Pls

I believe the motion that was made and passed was to have a hearing on STX on Monday and then to have the vote on Tuesday which must, by law, take place in STT..

The motion to have the hearing on STX on Monday passed.....Unfortunately, the motion to hold the vote Tuesday did not.

I believe the motion that was made and passed was to have a hearing on STX on Monday and then to have the vote on Tuesday which must, by law, take place in STT..

The motion to have the hearing on STX on Monday passed.....Unfortunately, the motion to hold the vote Tuesday did not.

Thanks, I only heard Nellies motion. It was amended I assume?

There should be an IQ test requirement for Senators, constitution notwithstanding. THis is embarrassing. So sick of the fish fry politics.

How about an intelligence test to be able to vote?

There should be an IQ test requirement for Senators, constitution notwithstanding. THis is embarrassing. So sick of the fish fry politics.

How about an intelligence test to be able to vote?

(tu)

So only the educated elite can vote? The U.S. is supposed to be a democracy for the people by the people with everybody entitled to representation.

How do you define "educated"? Some people think we should require college graduation as a senator requirement. Would an associates degree qualify? Degrees are not equal depending on school and major so not an equal standard.

A curious, lifelong learner with a history of questioning and doing research would be a good candidate. But, they seldom run for office.

So only the educated elite can vote?

An IQ test measures intelligence not education and the former isn't necessarily dependent upon the latter.

https://www.brandman.edu/blog/to-what-degree-is-being-educated-mistaken-with-being-intelligent-in-our-society

Morons have and should have a right to vote. You will see this during the republican primaries.

Morons have and should have a right to vote. You will see this during the republican primaries.

(tu)

There should not be any elimination process in a democracy in order to vote. Everybody should have a voice.

In the VI the uninformed voters outnumber the informed voters by a wide margin, and many of the informed don't bother to register. There are also quite a few who don't want to be bothered with politics so they don't register to vote. IMO, that's part of the problem.

I can only hope, that on Monday, the people of St. Croix can convince their elected Representatives of how critically important it is to get this deal done.
The clock is ticking.
A third and better opportunity is extremely unlikely.

So only the educated elite can vote?

An IQ test measures intelligence not education and the former isn't necessarily dependent upon the latter.

https://www.brandman.edu/blog/to-what-degree-is-being-educated-mistaken-with-being-intelligent-in-our-society

I agree everyone should have a vote. But an IQ requirement for elected (or appointed) officials may be an improvement. May end up with a bunch of empty offices.

So only the educated elite can vote?

An IQ test measures intelligence not education and the former isn't necessarily dependent upon the latter.

https://www.brandman.edu/blog/to-what-degree-is-being-educated-mistaken-with-being-intelligent-in-our-society

(tu)(tu)

There should also be an education requirement for Senators. We require doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. to have degrees. In the 21st century, these senators (who allocate millions of dollars and enact complex laws/policies) should have some sort of formal education. Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

Can Marvin "no more female officers" Blyden really understand complex financial transactions, the tax code, or many of the complex areas he must regulate?

So only the educated elite can vote?

An IQ test measures intelligence not education and the former isn't necessarily dependent upon the latter.

https://www.brandman.edu/blog/to-what-degree-is-being-educated-mistaken-with-being-intelligent-in-our-society

I agree everyone should have a vote. But an IQ requirement for elected (or appointed) officials may be an improvement. May end up with a bunch of empty offices.

Good one!

I'd settle for a polygraph, a psychological test and an ethics test.

Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

Um, no. They had to create a government from scratch that had to function as an overseer of an association of states with widely varying and opposing interests, had to create a new monetary system, had to deal in foreign relations with the French and Spanish still claiming land, had to deal with the natives' land they were taking away, had to deal with structuring their part in an international commerce system, had to deal with . . . . .

Most of the founders and state leaders were highly educated, and well-read. Some of the founders - Jefferson and Madison, in particular - dedicated months just to to study previous governments and writings and critiques about them to figure out how to cobble something together that would work. Try reading some of the speeches from the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. It's humbling.

VI senators already have the government, basic laws, and monetary system in place. Sure, they need the smarts to be able to run it, and to change laws without making things worse. But they don't face anything near the complexity of post-Revolutionary government construction.

Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

Um, no. They had to create a government from scratch that had to function as an overseer of an association of states with widely varying and opposing interests, had to create a new monetary system, had to deal in foreign relations with the French and Spanish still claiming land, had to deal with the natives' land they were taking away, had to deal with structuring their part in an international commerce system, had to deal with . . . . .

Most of the founders and state leaders were highly educated, and well-read. Some of the founders - Jefferson and Madison, in particular - dedicated months just to to study previous governments and writings and critiques about them to figure out how to cobble something together that would work. Try reading some of the speeches from the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. It's humbling.

VI senators already have the government, basic laws, and monetary system in place. Sure, they need the smarts to be able to run it, and to change laws without making things worse. But they don't face anything near the complexity of post-Revolutionary government construction.

I was only referring to state legislators who served during much of America's history -- not the Founding Fathers in their roles as engineers of an entire country's political system. No serious argument can be made that state-level governance in 1810 was more complex than it is today.

I love the Federalist Papers! Be sure to read Tocqueville's writings as well.

Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

Um, no. They had to create a government from scratch that had to function as an overseer of an association of states with widely varying and opposing interests, had to create a new monetary system, had to deal in foreign relations with the French and Spanish still claiming land, had to deal with the natives' land they were taking away, had to deal with structuring their part in an international commerce system, had to deal with . . . . .

Most of the founders and state leaders were highly educated, and well-read. Some of the founders - Jefferson and Madison, in particular - dedicated months just to to study previous governments and writings and critiques about them to figure out how to cobble something together that would work. Try reading some of the speeches from the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. It's humbling.

VI senators already have the government, basic laws, and monetary system in place. Sure, they need the smarts to be able to run it, and to change laws without making things worse. But they don't face anything near the complexity of post-Revolutionary government construction.

I was only referring to state legislators who served during much of America's history -- not the Founding Fathers in their roles as engineers of an entire country's political system. No serious argument can be made that state-level governance in 1810 was more complex than it is today.

I love the Federalist Papers! Be sure to read Tocqueville's writings as well.

Oh, I see. That gives new meaning to the phrase "when the Constitution was written", then.

Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

Um, no. They had to create a government from scratch that had to function as an overseer of an association of states with widely varying and opposing interests, had to create a new monetary system, had to deal in foreign relations with the French and Spanish still claiming land, had to deal with the natives' land they were taking away, had to deal with structuring their part in an international commerce system, had to deal with . . . . .

Most of the founders and state leaders were highly educated, and well-read. Some of the founders - Jefferson and Madison, in particular - dedicated months just to to study previous governments and writings and critiques about them to figure out how to cobble something together that would work. Try reading some of the speeches from the Constitutional Convention, or the Federalist Papers. It's humbling.

VI senators already have the government, basic laws, and monetary system in place. Sure, they need the smarts to be able to run it, and to change laws without making things worse. But they don't face anything near the complexity of post-Revolutionary government construction.

I was only referring to state legislators who served during much of America's history -- not the Founding Fathers in their roles as engineers of an entire country's political system. No serious argument can be made that state-level governance in 1810 was more complex than it is today.

I love the Federalist Papers! Be sure to read Tocqueville's writings as well.

Oh, I see. That gives new meaning to the phrase "when the Constitution was written", then.

It's true for periods even before the ratification of the Constitution. A VI Senator's job in 2015 is far more complicated than that of a member of colonial Virginia's General Assembly in 1750.

VI law has some provisions that prohibit the insane and the mentally incompetent from voting. Emphasis is added below.

---------------------

TITLE EIGHTEEN Elections

Chapter 13. Qualifications of Electors

18 V.I.C. § 263 (2014)

§ 263. Loss of franchise by felon; mental incompetents

(a) No inmate of a public or private institution for the insane and no person under the care of a guardian by reason of any mental incapacity shall be entitled to vote.

(b) Every person who has been convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction of a felony or of a crime involving moral turpitude shall be debarred from voting while serving out his sentence, including any period of incarceration, probation, or parole.

(c) The right to vote is automatically restored to every person convicted of a felony upon completion of all the conditions of the person's sentence, including any period of incarceration, probation, parole, or payment of restitution.

I'd settle for a polygraph, a psychological test and an ethics test.

(tu)(tu)(tu)

One good thing in all of this: thank goodness we don't have to hear Chucky yelling in the hearings!! (although I do feel sorry for her about her son's murder)

One other comment: Jannette Millin Young is just atrocious! She is suspicious and combative, and doesn't have a clue.

Being a legislator was far less intellectually-demanding when the Constitution was written.

I was only referring to state legislators who served during much of America's history -- not the Founding Fathers in their roles as engineers of an entire country's political system. No serious argument can be made that state-level governance in 1810 was more complex than it is today.

I love the Federalist Papers! Be sure to read Tocqueville's writings as well.

Oh, I see. That gives new meaning to the phrase "when the Constitution was written", then.

It's true for periods even before the ratification of the Constitution. A VI Senator's job in 2015 is far more complicated than that of a member of colonial Virginia's General Assembly in 1750.

Oh, I see. That gives yet another new meaning to the phrase "when the Constitution was written". I would agree that in the 1750's, legislating was far less complicated, because it was an entirely different situation than just before the Revolution and going forward. What with them being a colony under the thumbs of a monarchy, and all. Things were a little more cut and dry. However, we do have the early state legislators to thank for creating the bases of the federal Constitution from their own state constitutions.

If you want to make a credible point, best to start off with what you meant to say in the first place, instead of meandering around a span of 60 years or so. It's called "moving the goalposts", and it's hard to address. I would also say "It's true for periods before the ratification of the Constitution", and leave out the "even", as there actually are very valid arguments that governing in the early 1800's was just as complex as the VI today, only on different issues. However, this is a thread about the 2010's, and the current VI senators, so I won't get into that.

I almost never express an opinion--and certainly not on politics.....This is one of those posts I know I should avoid....but here goes....

In addition to the VI, I've lived in New York (Rochester and New York City), DC, New Mexico and Boston. NM and Mass. were ok. But the legislatures in New York and DC were (and I believe still are) FAR, FAR, FAR worse than the VI. Pick any scale....stupid comments, cluelessness, criminality, self-interest, number of officials in jail, amount of damage done....ANY scale. You would not believe the number of NYS legislators that went to jail this year -- even the ex-speaker was convicted. And I'm told it is much worse in Chicago, Louisiana, Florida and now Wisconsin -- don't know for sure.

The problem here is that you are actually paying attention to what happens in politics and what people say. You actually pay attention here. Politicians are worse here??? Geez....watch the DC local news sometime....it makes the VI legislature look like Harvard.

That's depressing!

That's depressing!

It is - but I think the point is that the situation in the USVI isn't unusual. I think a lot of those who move here are really never much involved in local politics stateside but in such a small community here it's pretty much "in your face" and unavoidable. A lot of misinformation gets disseminated on this forum and much of it is, I think, based on an assumption that the shenanigans that go on here are unique to the territory when of course they're not - by a long stretch.

Not sure why some keep referencing what some states do/out of territory conduct when people are proposing solutions to the VIs ills. The tactic amounts to a thinly-veiled appeal to majority, which is a fallacy. When a majority consensus is unavailable (it usually is), outlier states are frequently used.

The VI legislature often looks like a junior high school-level student government, and should be improved. That Preet Bharara has locked up some corrupt NY legislators is of no moment. I have high expectations for my hometown.

And now back to our originally scheduled topic.