article I, section 3.6
Slate features today a snazzy piece today comparing George Bush and Barry Bonds in 2007 to Richard Nixon and Henry Aaron in 1974. It turns out both Bush and Bonds, like Nixon and Aaron before them, are chasing records that were heretofore considered "untouchable." It's kind of clever and a little bit forced, but the salient point remains: President Bush is approaching a record disapproval rating. Now, to anyone with even only half a brain (which I guess would include President George Walker Bush), this is self-evident. And, sadly, maybe - probably - even expected. But there's a larger point here.
The column obliquely mentions impeachment, but fails to elaborate, and this is problematic. The column seems to be directed, actually, at the scores of people who don't have any idea what impeachment means. Impeachment, in fact, could be - or perhaps should be - even easier than the process to which is alluded. The author mentions that a two-thirds majority is required to impeach a sitting president, but that's only partly true. The House of Representatives must first pass Articles of Impeachment by only a simple majority. That is: fifty-one to forty-nine, percentage-wise. The Senate must then try the accused assho- I mean, President - but they're the ones who need to agree by the aforementioned two-thirds standard toward which Dubya is quickly approaching. Anyone who is (or is not) a fan of the Electoral College may see where this is going.
The thing is, we've still got that pesky Article III defining the population of the Senate. And with two Senators per state no matter the size (I'm looking at you, Wyoming), that means those goddamn flyover states can still make life difficult for the rest (and by "rest," I mean "most") of us. It's clear that something must be done. But don't get me wrong. I'm not proposing anything radical like giving two-thirds of the continent to Mexico. I have a very simple solution; instantaneously I can dispose of probably forty problematic senators. All territory between the Mississippi River and the Sierra Nevada Mountians shall become part of the State of California. All territory between the Mississippi River and the Appalachian Mountains shall become part of the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Except for Texas, of course - Texas, we'll give back to Mexico.) And there you go: we all win, and democracy is served. And it just might help solve that Electoral College problem that got us here in the first place.
Comments
But when will people learn that autonomous collective is the way to go?
Clearly though we start with the low-hanging fruit -- giving Texas back to Mexico. It's only fair. Maybe if the Texans are extra nice, we'll give them "amnesty."
And as much as I like our former-Texan friends, there is something really creepy about how anyone that is from another state, then moves there, then returns, has been indelibly altered in a bad way.