King of America

[Bigun]

King of America

If you were made KING of America for 5 years only to get our economy in tip-top shape and there was a proviso that what you did during that time could not be undone for 10 years after you left. What would you do and why would you do it?

Here's my list:

Effective January 1 next year the following are decreed:

1.   The constitution is amended so as to permanently prohibit any central banking authority such as the current ‘Federal Reserve Banks” And to provide for the ‘United States dollar" being henceforth defined as the forward price of an ounce of gold as of January 1 next year. Any currency issuer shall be prepared to defend the value of its currency in these terms. (Ensures stability of currency value and prevents reckless expansions of money supply.)

2.   16th Amendment is repealed and FAIRTAX is implemented. (Frees us from needless government intrusions and endless violations of the 4th and 5th amendments. Would make the economy expand like no one alive today has ever seen.)

3.   Constitution is amended to provide the Chief Executive line item veto authority. (Greatly Reins in wasteful government spending)

4.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that the right of states to freely leave the union is inherent. (FREEDOM)
 
5.   The Executive Branch of government shall be composed solely of:
       a. The offices of The President and Vice President b. The Department of State c. The Department of Defense d. The Department of the Treasury

6.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that the word “life” means from the moment of conception until the moment of natural death.

7.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that term "Natural Born Citizen" as it relates the United States Constitution means a person born of parents who are citizens of the United States of America only at the time of the child’s birth regardless of where they happen to be located at the time of the child’s birth, and “birthright citizenship” extends solely to the offspring of parents who are citizens of the United States of America only at the time of the child’s birth regardless of where they happen to be located at the time of the child’s birth.

8.   Constitution is amended to make clear that Islam is not a “religion” as the authors of the first amendment understood the term and thus not protected under the United States Constitution.

9.   Constitution is amended to make clear that the word “Commerce” as it relates to the U.S. Constitution means interactions among parties where actual value is exchanged.


Anyone else want to play?

@Cyber Liberty @mystery-ak @Sanguine @bigheadfred @Smokin Joe @roamer_1 @XenaLee @skeeter @austingirl

[ABX]

None of the above. I would immediately resign and return the process to the Constitutionally defined one. Becoming 'king' even for a day, destroys the foundation we have. Once that precedent has been set, anything I do, no matter how good intentioned, can be over-turned by the next 'king for a day'.

[Bigun]

None of the above. I would immediately resign and return the process to the Constitutionally defined one. Becoming 'king' even for a day, destroys the foundation we have. Once that precedent has been set, anything I do, no matter how good intentioned, can be over-turned by the next 'king for a day'.

@ABX

OK! I agree! But what I am attempting to do here is role play a Convention of the States.  Let's see where it goes if anywhere.

[Cyber Liberty]

@ABX

OK! I agree! But what I am attempting to do here is role play a Convention of the States.  Let's see where it goes if anywhere.

I think if we do an Article V, the Rats will find a way to pollute the process the same way they've ruined Congressional Redistricting via "Independent Commissions."

[austingirl]

King of America

If you were made KING of America for 5 years only to get our economy in tip-top shape and there was a proviso that what you did during that time could not be undone for 10 years after you left. What would you do and why would you do it?

Here's my list:

Effective January 1 next year the following are decreed:

1.   The constitution is amended so as to permanently prohibit any central banking authority such as the current ‘Federal Reserve Banks” And to provide for the ‘United States dollar" being henceforth defined as the forward price of an ounce of gold as of January 1 next year. Any currency issuer shall be prepared to defend the value of its currency in these terms. (Ensures stability of currency value and prevents reckless expansions of money supply.)

2.   16th Amendment is repealed and FAIRTAX is implemented. (Frees us from needless government intrusions and endless violations of the 4th and 5th amendments. Would make the economy expand like no one alive today has ever seen.)

3.   Constitution is amended to provide the Chief Executive line item veto authority. (Greatly Reins in wasteful government spending)

4.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that the right of states to freely leave the union is inherent. (FREEDOM)
 
5.   The Executive Branch of government shall be composed solely of:
       a. The offices of The President and Vice President b. The Department of State c. The Department of Defense d. The Department of the Treasury

6.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that the word “life” means from the moment of conception until the moment of natural death.

7.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that term "Natural Born Citizen" as it relates the United States Constitution means a person born of parents who are citizens of the United States of America only at the time of the child’s birth regardless of where they happen to be located at the time of the child’s birth, and “birthright citizenship” extends solely to the offspring of parents who are citizens of the United States of America only at the time of the child’s birth regardless of where they happen to be located at the time of the child’s birth.

8.   Constitution is amended to make clear that Islam is not a “religion” as the authors of the first amendment understood the term and thus not protected under the United States Constitution.

9.   Constitution is amended to make clear that the word “Commerce” as it relates to the U.S. Constitution means interactions among parties where actual value is exchanged.


Anyone else want to play?

@Cyber Liberty @mystery-ak @Sanguine @bigheadfred @Smokin Joe @roamer_1 @XenaLee @skeeter @austingirl

I agree with all of your points. However, "King" is probably not the best title. 

[Sanguine]

I think if we do an Article V, the Rats will find a way to pollute the process the same way they've ruined Congressional Redistricting via "Independent Commissions."

And, we will be able to say we tried everything legally possible to return the rule of law to this country.

[Sanguine]

I like the list @Bigun, and the term "king for a day" is fine for this discussion.  The only things I would add is term limits (return the government to public servants who do not go into the government to profit personally), elected officials have to follow all the laws that all citizens and residents have to follow ( no insider trading, etc.), while in office you get a paycheck, reimbursement for reasonable expenses and nothing more - no retirement plan specifically, and deficit spending is only allowed for a determined time and under a narrowly defined set of circumstances like a declared war.

[catfish1957]

(1) Effectively immediately....Totally dismantle the federal government, with exception of Defense, Treasury, State, and a newly formed small"state coordination" Department (for No. 2 below.) This department would monitor and establish benchmarks, and best practices among states.

(2) Effective Day 2...   delegate all other aspects of gonvernance to the States.

[Cyber Liberty]

I like the list @Bigun, and the term "king for a day" is fine for this discussion.  The only things I would add is term limits (return the government to public servants who do not go into the government to profit personally), elected officials have to follow all the laws that all citizens and residents have to follow ( no insider trading, etc.), while in office you get a paycheck, reimbursement for reasonable expenses and nothing more - no retirement plan specifically, and deficit spending is only allowed for a determined time and under a narrowly defined set of circumstances like a declared war.

For a game-changer, I'd like to see "Representation by Lot."  Just pick names out of a hat to serve in Congress.  Lawyers are to be disqualified because they have a conflict of interests.  I'm sure there's a lot wrong with that, but I have seen it suggested.

[Bigun]

For a game-changer, I'd like to see "Representation by Lot."  Just pick names out of a hat to serve in Congress.  Lawyers are to be disqualified because they have a conflict of interests.  I'm sure there's a lot wrong with that, but I have seen it suggested.

Make it like jury duty, paid on a per diem basis. No retirement benefits.  And yes!  It most certainly is a conflict of interest for lawyers, officers of the court all, to serve in a second branch of government charged with writing the laws.

[Bigun]

I like the list @Bigun, and the term "king for a day" is fine for this discussion.  The only things I would add is term limits (return the government to public servants who do not go into the government to profit personally), elected officials have to follow all the laws that all citizens and residents have to follow ( no insider trading, etc.), while in office you get a paycheck, reimbursement for reasonable expenses and nothing more - no retirement plan specifically, and deficit spending is only allowed for a determined time and under a narrowly defined set of circumstances like a declared war.

Thanks @Sanguine but I didn't forget anything.  Don't want any arbitrary limits placed on my possible choices at all.

[libertybele]

I think if we do an Article V, the Rats will find a way to pollute the process the same way they've ruined Congressional Redistricting via "Independent Commissions."

The time for an Article V, Convention of States came and went.  The time was when the GOP held the majority and the state legislatures were predominately conservative or at least GOP.

[Cyber Liberty]

Make it like jury duty, paid on a per diem basis. No retirement benefits.

Yup!  I don't even care if we house them in 5-star DeeCee Hotels, we'd still be billions ahead. 

And I reiterate:  Lawyers are to be disqualified (whether we go to Rep by Lot or not).  I'd like to see a day where laws can be understood by everybody who is ruled by them.  Having to have a lawyer explain to me the reasoning behind why I'm being sued/prosecuted sucks and only benefits the ruling class.

Thanks @Sanguine but I didn't forget anything.  Don't want any arbitrary limits placed on my possible choices at all.

This is a brainstorming thread.  Have at it!

[Cyber Liberty]

The time for an Article V, Convention of States came and went.  The time was when the GOP held the majority and the state legislatures were predominately conservative or at least GOP.

The time was never here.  I did not trust the "Republican" politicians any more than the Rats when it comes to feathering their nests.

[Bigun]

The time for an Article V, Convention of States came and went.  The time was when the GOP held the majority and the state legislatures were predominately conservative or at least GOP.

The time for an Article V Convention never was IMHO. The same people who elect our representatives now would be the ones deciding who should be sent to such a convention.   I rest my case.

[Cyber Liberty]

The time for an Article V Convention never was IMHO. The same people who elect our representatives now would be the ones deciding who should be sent to such a convention.   I rest my case.

And the same people sending people to their State Legislatures.

[Bigun]

And the same people sending people to their State Legislatures.

For sure!  Last time I looked they were representatives.

[Cyber Liberty]

For sure!  Last time I looked they were representatives.

Most states are Bicameral, so Reps and Senators.  That's the kind of creature who will vote to Ratify so I am not impressed by assurances items voted in at an Article V must withstand the Ratification process.

[roamer_1]

@Bigun

Criticism:

5.   The Executive Branch of government shall be composed solely of:
       a. The offices of The President and Vice President b. The Department of State c. The Department of Defense d. The Department of the Treasury

I get that - but I don't think that is enough... Weights and measures, interstate rails, roads, and waterways, federal LEOs, Border and coastal patrols, etc. There is quite a bit of stuff that is necessary to knitting us together as one nation that cannot be handled by the states, and would belong in the executive branch.

I do however, agree wholeheartedly in spirit.

6.   Constitution is amended to make perfectly clear that the word “life” means from the moment of conception until the moment of natural death.

8.   Constitution is amended to make clear that Islam is not a “religion” as the authors of the first amendment understood the term and thus not protected under the United States Constitution.

Rather, to recognize the Christian God as the Creator, and the ultimate lawgiver... Our sense of right and wrong descending from the Judeo-Christian ethic. You are free to live and believe otherwise, but within those parameters as a matter of the recognition of rights... The rest then becomes moot.


In Addition:

Restore the election of senators to the states.

[Bigun]

@Bigun
Jb]Criticism:[/b]

I get that - but I don't think that is enough... Weights and measures, interstate rails, roads, and waterways, federal LEOs, Border and coastal patrols, etc. There is quite a bit of stuff that is necessary to knitting us together as one nation that cannot be handled by the states, and would belong in the executive branch.

I do however, agree wholeheartedly in spirit. 

@roamer_1

The Constitution I read,  specifically Article I, Section 8, gives those things to the Congress not the executive. 

[Bigun]

@Bigun

In Addition:

Restore the election of senators to the states.

 

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1

The Constitution I read,  specifically Article I, Section 8, gives those things to the Congress not the executive.

@Bigun
Granted, but Congress has the means of creation, not execution and maintenance. That is why they end up in the Executive aegis.

[Bigun]

@Bigun
Granted, but Congress has the means of creation, not execution and maintenance. That is why they end up in the Executive aegis.

Only because the congress has flat out refused to do its job. 

For one example :  Congress was given the absolute power to "coin money and regulate the value thereof".  Doesn't say a word about them having any power to pass that on to others does it?

[roamer_1]

Only because the congress has flat out refused to do its job. 

For one example :  Congress was given the absolute power to "coin money and regulate the value thereof".  Doesn't say a word about them having any power to pass that on to others does it?

Right - But Congress' power to coin money has no means of action. The Executive branch has the means of action... Like with war - Congress retains the power to wage war, but does not have the means to provide the action.

Congress doesn't DO anything. It empowers the Executive branch to do things. Everything the executive branch can do is forged in Congress.

[Bigun]

Right - But Congress' power to coin money has no means of action. The Executive branch has the means of action... Like with war - Congress retains the power to wage war, but does not have the means to provide the action.

Congress doesn't DO anything. It empowers the Executive branch to do things. Everything the executive branch can do is forged in Congress.

So who actually handles the "regulate the value thereof"  Can they do that themselves are must they turn that over to the Department of the Treasury as well?  Who says if we have a gold standard or not?  Is that the president or is that a prerogative of the Congress alone?

In case you haven't already figured it out, this stuff has been percolating with me for a LONG time now! Not picking on you @roamer_1

[roamer_1]

So who actually handles the "regulate the value thereof"  Can they do that themselves are must they turn that over to the Department of the Treasury as well?  Who says if we have a gold standard or not?  Is that the president or is that a prerogative of the Congress alone?

Well Congress, of course. If they don't approve of what the executive is doing, they write a new law that redefines the parameters of a department's powers... It would still be handed off to the Executive for execution. The department still resides in the executive branch.

In case you haven't already figured it out, this stuff has been percolating with me for a LONG time now! Not picking on you @roamer_1

NP @Bigun ... Like I said, I am with you in spirit - I would love to see most of the departments removed or greatly reduced, with the balance returned to the states.

All I am saying is that i think your reductions are a bit too tight in the actual doing of things... There are legitimate powers that should reside in the federal government, many of which we just take for granted. Common coin, common weights and measures, the ability to move freely about the country for people and commerce... Would you remove air traffic control from the federal level? What about barge traffic and rail traffic? What about port control? There is just a lot of things to consider.

[Bigun]

Well Congress, of course. If they don't approve of what the executive is doing, they write a new law that redefines the parameters of a department's powers... It would still be handed off to the Executive for execution. The department still resides in the executive branch.

NP @Bigun ... Like I said, I am with you in spirit - I would love to see most of the departments removed or greatly reduced, with the balance returned to the states.

All I am saying is that i think your reductions are a bit too tight in the actual doing of things... There are legitimate powers that should reside in the federal government, many of which we just take for granted. Common coin, common weights and measures, the ability to move freely about the country for people and commerce... Would you remove air traffic control from the federal level? What about barge traffic and rail traffic? What about port control? There is just a lot of things to consider.

Ok!  You can add one cabinet-level department back in. Should it be the Department of Commerce? 

[roamer_1]

Ok!  You can add one cabinet-level department back in. Should it be the Department of Commerce? 

LOL! Beats me.
 

[Cyber Liberty]

LOL! Beats me.
 

Education?

 

[roamer_1]

Education?

Harder than you think... Who defines minimum education standards in a uniform way across the states? How do you present your bona fides to higher education if those bona fides are undefined?

FDA: Who decides what food is, and protects labeling, and inspects to be sure what you're buying is what you want, uniformly, regardless of state?

[Cyber Liberty]

Harder than you think... Who defines minimum education standards in a uniform way across the states? How do you present your bona fides to higher education if those bona fides are undefined?

FDA: Who decides what food is, and protects labeling, and inspects to be sure what you're buying is what you want, uniformly, regardless of state?

"Minimum Standards" really means minimum.  There are approximately 50 states, one "colony" and one District racing to the minimum, and at great cost to the Treasury.  FDA makes more sense than HUD.  I'd add Bureau of Weights and Measures, but it's not Cabinet level.

[roamer_1]

"Minimum Standards" really means minimum.  There are approximately 50 states, one "colony" and one District racing to the minimum, and at great cost to the Treasury.  FDA makes more sense than HUD.  I'd add Bureau of Weights and Measures, but it's not Cabinet level.

That's right - What's broke is broke, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater, is all I am saying... And that is a whole lot harder to do than folks think. Damn right it needs fixed, one way or the other.'

It is all part and parcel with the states going unrepresented - I think that putting the senator back at the beck and call of his governor is about the most needed repair - hopefully the rest would follow.

[Cyber Liberty]

That's right - What's broke is broke, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater, is all I am saying... And that is a whole lot harder to do than folks think. Damn right it needs fixed, one way or the other.'

It is all part and parcel with the states going unrepresented - I think that putting the senator back at the beck and call of his governor is about the most needed repair - hopefully the rest would follow.

Then I think we can agree on two Amendments that need to be gone.  16 and 17.  I don't think repealing the 16th would put the stake I'd like to see in the heart of the IRS, though.

The last income tax before the 16th was passed in the late 19th Century, and was eventually found unconstitutional by the SCOTUS (which is why we have the 16th in the first place).  If we repeal it, and a future Congress and President decide they want it back, who's to say a future SCOTUS would have the same sense as the one over 100 years ago?  The SCOTUS has been off the rails for some time now, finding emanations and penumbras under every rock.  They can't even agree on what "Shall not be infringed" means.  Predicate Clause, dontchaknow. 

Every right assured by the Bill of Rights is subject to Judicial Review, all containing their own emanations and the occasional penumbras.  Reasonable regulations and all that.  Speaking of BATF, maybe we should have a hard look at what Treasury does?

[roamer_1]

Then I think we can agree on two Amendments that need to be gone.  16 and 17.  I don't think repealing the 16th would put the stake I'd like to see in the heart of the IRS, though.

The last income tax before the 16th was passed in the late 19th Century, and was eventually found unconstitutional by the SCOTUS (which is why we have the 16th in the first place).  If we repeal it, and a future Congress and President decide they want it back, who's to say a future SCOTUS would have the same sense as the one over 100 years ago?  The SCOTUS has been off the rails for some time now, finding emanations and penumbras under every rock.  They can't even agree on what "Shall not be infringed" means.  Predicate Clause, dontchaknow. 

Every right assured by the Bill of Rights is subject to Judicial Review, all containing their own emanations and the occasional penumbras.  Reasonable regulations and all that.  Speaking of BATF, maybe we should have a hard look at what Treasury does?

YES, I am against any form of income or property tax - It is directly against thrift, and asks nothing of those who refuse to work... A retail tax on non-essential goods would be my favored form...


As to the rest, I would be highly favorable to every department getting a major axe laid to their roots, both in powers and in money. And many can go away.

[Cyber Liberty]

Just don't nobody say "Root and Branch."   

[Absalom]

Monarchy has been Man's form of governance for 90% of the time
since the earliest cultures/societies and was Aristotle's preference.
Many cannot give up their infantile infatuation w/the republicrat party,
the creator of centralized governance and the destroyer of States Rights.

[Cyber Liberty]

Monarchy has been Man's form of governance for 90% of the time
since the earliest cultures/societies and was Aristotle's preference.
Many cannot give up their infantile infatuation w/the republicrat party,
the creator of centralized governance and the destroyer of States Rights.

It's been a part of this Republic too...two Presidents saw their sons follow them into the Presidency.

[Sanguine]

It's been a part of this Republic too...two Presidents saw their sons follow them into the Presidency.

But, only late in our history, and under what has become a corruption of the Republic.

[Cyber Liberty]

But, only late in our history, and under what has become a corruption of the Republic.

John Adams was the second President.  Not late in our history.  I think the two examples (John Quincy Adams and Bush 43) are a good illustration of why that's a dead-end.

[Sanguine]

John Adams was the second President.  Not late in our history.  I think the two examples (John Quincy Adams and Bush 43) are a good illustration of why that's a dead-end.

True.  I immediately thought (wrongly) of the Clintons.

[Cyber Liberty]

True.  I immediately thought (wrongly) of the Clintons.

The Clintons are trying, and failing so far.  The Clinton media will be pushing for Chelsea as soon as Hillary has officially given up, so stay vigilant.

[jmyrlefuller]

OK, I will play.

1. The states shall be required, if a bicameral legislature is used, to apportion one of their legislative houses according to fixed districts, regardless of population changes, that follow municipal boundaries (i.e. counties); this shall be a fulfillment of the requirement of a republican form of government.

2. The federal government shall not use bribery with federal funds to coerce states to impose policy they would not otherwise implement. All subsidies will be in accordance with the specific project being funded, without regard to unrelated policies. Likewise, such bribery or, in reverse, threats of taxation shall not be used against the people.

3. The courts shall not have the authority to overturn federal or state law without citing a specific Constitutional clause that it violates. Precedent shall not be considered a valid rationale for any ruling.

4. Persons under legal voting age shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives.

5. Persons who enter the United States unlawfully shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives, nor shall they be subject to equal protection. They shall be considered trespassers, and subject to expulsion accordingly.

That's about it.

[Cyber Liberty]

OK, I will play.

1. The states shall be required, if a bicameral legislature is used, to apportion one of their legislative houses according to fixed districts, regardless of population changes, that follow municipal boundaries (i.e. counties); this shall be a fulfillment of the requirement of a republican form of government.

2. The federal government shall not use bribery with federal funds to coerce states to impose policy they would not otherwise implement. All subsidies will be in accordance with the specific project being funded, without regard to unrelated policies. Likewise, such bribery or, in reverse, threats of taxation shall not be used against the people.

3. The courts shall not have the authority to overturn federal or state law without citing a specific Constitutional clause that it violates. Precedent shall not be considered a valid rationale for any ruling.

4. Persons under legal voting age shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives.

5. Persons who enter the United States unlawfully shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives, nor shall they be subject to equal protection. They shall be considered trespassers, and subject to expulsion accordingly.

That's about it.

Excellent points for discussion on @Bigun's thread here.

[Sanguine]

Excellent points for discussion on @Bigun's thread here.

Yes, they are.

[Bigun]

OK, I will play.

1. The states shall be required, if a bicameral legislature is used, to apportion one of their legislative houses according to fixed districts, regardless of population changes, that follow municipal boundaries (i.e. counties); this shall be a fulfillment of the requirement of a republican form of government.

2. The federal government shall not use bribery with federal funds to coerce states to impose policy they would not otherwise implement. All subsidies will be in accordance with the specific project being funded, without regard to unrelated policies. Likewise, such bribery or, in reverse, threats of taxation shall not be used against the people.

3. The courts shall not have the authority to overturn federal or state law without citing a specific Constitutional clause that it violates. Precedent shall not be considered a valid rationale for any ruling.

4. Persons under legal voting age shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives.

5. Persons who enter the United States unlawfully shall not be counted toward a state's apportionment of Representatives, nor shall they be subject to equal protection. They shall be considered trespassers, and subject to expulsion accordingly.

That's about it.

Very good @jmyrlefuller !  Thanks!

Several VERY good points raised here!  I particularly like #s 3 and 5.  The others aren't bad either with perhaps a few tweaks in wording.

Your list triggered an addition to mine to whit: "The Constitution is amended to require all legislation introduced in the federal legislature to cite the specific wording in the Constitution which would allow the action proposed". 

[jmyrlefuller]

Very good @jmyrlefuller !  Thanks!

Several VERY good points raised here!  I particularly like #s 3 and 5.  The others aren't bad either with perhaps a few tweaks in wording.

Your list triggered an addition to mine to whit: "The Constitution is amended to require all legislation introduced in the federal legislature to cite the specific wording in the Constitution which would allow the action proposed".

1 and 4 are designed specifically to avoid some things that are happening in our blue states, where the cities are running roughshod over the rest of the state. It is a way to shut down, or at least slow down, tyranny of majority.

1 addresses gerrymandering. It follows the same basic premise as our U.S. Senate and is similar to the Dirksen Amendment from the late 1960s.

4 addresses population engineering. Say there's a baby boom in one particular state. The population goes up in the census, but the same amount of voters are present until those children turn 18. So, vote-for-vote, the adult population gets disproportionate voting rights compared to a similarly sized state where there are the same amount of voters, but they're not having as many children. (If you want to talk a "one-man one-vote" principle, that's a huge flaw. When you can create "men" that don't vote to pad your vote, it's not one-man, one-vote anymore.) This will also shut down policies that selectively reward certain areas for having more children to pad their voting power and discourage other areas from doing the same.

2 is in direct response to Obamacare and a lot of the highway bills you see where they threaten to withhold federal highway funds if a state won't impose this policy or that.

[Bigun]

1 and 4 are designed specifically to avoid some things that are happening in our blue states, where the cities are running roughshod over the rest of the state. It is a way to shut down, or at least slow down, tyranny of majority.

1 addresses gerrymandering. It follows the same basic premise as our U.S. Senate and is similar to the Dirksen Amendment from the late 1960s.

4 addresses population engineering. Say there's a baby boom in one particular state. The population goes up in the census, but the same amount of voters are present until those children turn 18. So, vote-for-vote, the adult population gets disproportionate voting rights compared to a similarly sized state where there are the same amount of voters, but they're not having as many children. (If you want to talk a "one-man one-vote" principle, that's a huge flaw. When you can create "men" that don't vote to pad your vote, it's not one-man, one-vote anymore.) This will also shut down policies that selectively reward certain areas for having more children to pad their voting power and discourage other areas from doing the same.

2 is in direct response to Obamacare and a lot of the highway bills you see where they threaten to withhold federal highway funds if a state won't impose this policy or that.

I understand perfectly.