INCLUDE_DATA

Recent Comments

    Author Archive

    The U.S. Constitution provides for a super-majority vote in the U.S. Senate for the following reasons:

    1. Overriding presidential vetos
    2. Removing Federal officers through impeachment
    3. Ratifying teaties
    4. Expelling members from the House or Senate
    5. Proposing constitutional amendments

    The 14th and 25th amendments added provisions for other super majority requirements related to holding civil or military office while engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” and presidental succession.

    However, even though the founding fathers clearly intended regular legislative matters to require a simple majority vote, evidenced by the grant of a vote to the Vice President in those cases where the Senators are “equally divided”, the U. S. Senate by “rules and precedents” require either a two-thirds or a three/fifths vote for the following:

    1. Invoke Cloture -
    Requires three-fifths vote on most questions and two-thirds vote to amend Senate rules.

    2. Suspend the Rules -
    Two-thirds vote to suspend the standing rules of the Senate

    3. Postpone Treaty Consideration Indefinitely -
    Requires a vote of two-thirds

    4. Make A Bill A Special Order -
    Requires a vote of two-thirds

    5. Waive the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 -
    Requires a vote of three-fifths

    The most common way for a minority of members of the U. S. Senate to delay or kill legislation is to prevent cloture (the closure of debate).

    As described above, invoking closure requires a vote of three-fifths of all Senators (60 of 100).

    This requirement adopted as a rule of the Senate, not a constitutional requirement, means that 41 Senators can block any legislative proposal.

    If you add up the population if the 21 smallest states, which would be represented by 42 Senators, the total population in those states equals approximately 11 percent of the total population.

    This means, that under Senate RULES, any legislative proposal in the United States Senate can be blocked by Senators representing only 11 percent of the population.

    Clearly, our Founding Fathers did not intend to allow such a minority to potentially control the legislative process.

    A review of the circumstances under which the Founding Fathers, included in the Constitution, requirements for super-majorities reinforces the conclusion that the U. S. Senate by RULE has substantially modified the intent of our Consitution.

    Categories : Government
    Comments (0)

    milkenThe Best-Performing Cities index was designed to measure objectively which U.S. metropolitan areas are most successful in terms of job creation and retention, the quality of jobs being produced, and overall economic performance. Specifically, it pinpoints where jobs are being created and maintained, where wages and salaries are increasing, and where economies and businesses are growing and thriving.

    The index allows businesses, industry associations, economic development agencies, investors, academics, government officials, and public policy groups to assess, monitor, and gain insight into each metro’s relative performance. It also provides benchmarking data that can be used in developing strategies to improve and maintain a metro’s economic performance. Moreover, it is a tool for understanding consumer markets and business expansion opportunities. In today’s recessionary climate, it helps determine which regions may present the lowest risk.

    View or download rating table

    View or download the full report

    Categories : Regionalism
    Comments (0)

    pittmayor“I’m most definitely up for the challenge,” Mr. Ravenstahl said. “I learned a lot in my first term, and we are ready to move forward.”

    By most measures he has been fairly successful as mayor. He cut the city’s work force by 2 percent, streamlined snow removal and received increased economic development aid from state officials in Harrisburg. The result has been budget surpluses for the last four years.

    Moreover, the city has done fairly well in replacing its steel industry with jobs in education, health care and a variety of “green” businesses.

    Read entire NY Times article

    Categories : Mayors
    Comments (0)
    Things could be worse. I could be a mayor.
    –Lyndon Johnson

    “Things could be worse.  I could be a Mayor.” Lyndon Johnson

    What’s killing the Dayton Region?

    Lack of strong and effective political leadership!

    What’s needed?

    A strong mayor form of government!  Read this article on Strong Mayors

    Do a little research into cities across the U.S. that have been successful.  Cities that have been “turned around”.  In every case you will find one common ingredient, strong and effective political leadership.

    • Columbus, former Mayor Sensenbrenner
    • Indianapolis, former Mayor Hudnut III
    • Charleston, Mayor Riley
    • Louisville, Mayor Abramson
    • Chicago, Mayor Daley
    • New York, former Mayor Giuliani and Mayor Bloomberg
    • Pittsburg, Mayor Ravenstahl
    • Philadelphia, former Mayor Rendell
    • Richmond, VA, former Mayor Wilder
    • Oakland, Mayor Brown
    • New Haven, former Mayor Lee
    • Boston, former Mayor White

    The list can go on and on, the point is without strong and effective political leadership the City of Dayton and along with it the Dayton Region are doomed.

    Categories : Dayton
    Comments (0)

    What’s killing the Dayton Region?

    John PattersonThose who have been engaged in working to save our region know the answer.  Those who have studied the elements of successful regions know the answer.  The leaders in the regional community know the answer.  The media, especially the Dayton Daily News, knows the answer.

    Critical common elements of regions that have become successful, many facing significantly greater challenges then the Dayton Region, are:

    1. Unload the baggage of the past the most important being the old guard leaders that keep trying the same old failed approach. A small group of well intentioned community/business leaders cannot impact in a significant way the direction of a region.  Their approach to generating change using a business model, that may be effective in the business environment, fails consistently in the community environment.  The days when the likes of John Patterson could dictate direction to a community have long past.  But today’s business leaders continue to think using the John Patterson model through a small group of business leaders, meeting in private and deciding what needs to happen, can somehow effectuate change.  It simply doesn’t work!  All you need to do is assess the lack of progress of the Dayton Region over the past 30 years for confirmation. Regions that have become successful have dumped this model of community development and change long ago.

    Categories : Regionalism
    Comments (0)
    Oct
    10

    Strong Mayor Trends

    Posted by: admin | Comments (0)

    U.S. CITIES (Population over 100,000)

    Adopted Mayor – Council Government

    1990 – Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Pop. 383,764
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    1993 – St. Petersburg, Florida
    Pop. 249,090
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    1993 – Fresno, California
    Pop. 457,719
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    1994 – Sioux Falls, South Dakota
    Pop. 136,695
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    1998 – Oakland, California
    Pop. 397,976
    Replaced Council – Manager government
    6 year pilot made permanent in 2004

    1999 – Spokane, Washington
    Pop. 196,721
    Replaced Council – Manager government
    2002 proposal to return to Council – Manager government failed

    2002 – Hartford, Connecticut
    Pop. 124,848
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    2003 – Richmond, Virginia
    Pop. 192,494
    Replaced Council – Manager government

    2004 – San Diego, California
    Pop. 1,263,756
    Replaced Council – Manager government
    5 year pilot starts in 2006

    Adopted Council – Manager Government

    2004 – El Paso, Texas
    Pop. 592,099
    Replaced Mayor – Council government

    2004 – Topeka, Kansas
    Pop. 121,809
    Replaced Mayor – Council government
    1985, Replaced Commission government with
    Mayor – Council government

    2005 – Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Pop. 122,206
    Replaced Commission government

    Categories : Dayton
    Comments (0)

    “STRONG” MAYOR-COUNCIL

    Under this system the Mayor is the chief executive and the City Council is the legislative body.  This system is modeled after the Federal Constitution structure of government.

    The primary components are:

    MAYOR
    Chief Executive
    CITY COUNCIL
    Legislature
    • Not A Member Of The City Council
    • Proposes City Budget
    • Appoints Department Directors
    • Veto Authority
    • Elects Own Presiding Officer
    • Sets City Council Agenda
    • Approves City Budget
    • Mayoral Veto Override Authority

    COUNCIL-MANAGER

    Under this system the City Council is the legislative body and an appointed City Manager is the Chief executive.  This system is modeled after the corporate structure of governance.

    The primary components are:

    CITY COUNCIL
    Legislature
    CITY MANAGER
    Chief Executive
    • Appoints City Manager
    • Approves City Budget
    • Mayor Is City Council Chairperson
    • Proposes City Budget
    • Appoints Department Directors
    • Sets City Council Agenda

    Categories : Dayton
    Comments (0)
    Sep
    23

    Ohio Redistricting Reform Proposal

    Posted by: admin | Comments (0)

    The Ohio Senate is expected to vote today on a proposed constitutional amendment that would overhaul Ohio’s partisan process for determining how to draw legislative and congressional districts.

    The resolution, which passed committee yesterday on a party-line vote, would create a new seven-member board and require a five-vote supermajority to pass new state and federal maps.

    SJR 5 Text

    SJR 5 Analysis

    New language in proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution reads in part….

    Article XI

    (A) The Ohio redistricting commission shall consist of seven members and shall be responsible for the redistricting of this state for congress and the general assembly. Beginning with the year 2011, after the first day of February but before the first day of March of each year ending in the numeral one, four members shall be appointed to the commission in the following manner:

    (1) The legislative leader of each of the two largest political parties in the Ohio house of representatives shall each appoint one member.

    (2) The legislative leader of each of the two largest political parties in the Ohio senate shall each appoint one member.

    (B)

    (1) All meetings of the Ohio redistricting commission shall be open to the public. The governor shall give the four commission members appointed by the leaders in the general assembly, and the public, at least two weeks advance notice of the date, time, and place of the first meeting of the commission, which shall be held after the first day of March but before the sixteenth day of March of the year ending in the numeral one. At that first meeting, the four members appointed under division (A) of this section shall convene, select co-chairpersons, and adopt procedural rules for the operation of the commission. Those four members shall then proceed with a process of appointing, by unanimous vote of the four members, the remaining three members of the commission. If additional meetings are required for the process of selecting the remaining three members of the commission, the meetings shall be called by the commission co-chairpersons with at least two days prior notice.

    In selecting the three additional appointments under this division, the four commission members appointed by the leaders in the general assembly shall give due consideration to the diversity of the state.

    (2) If the four commission members appointed by the leaders in the general assembly are unable to unanimously appoint the required three additional members under division (B)(1) of this section by the fifteenth day of April of the year ending in the numeral one, the positions of the three additional members shall be filled as follows not later than the twentieth day of April:

    (a) Each member of the commission appointed by the leaders in the general assembly shall submit the name of one proposed commission member to the governor. No two members of the commission shall submit the name of the same proposed commission member to the governor under this division.

    (b) The governor shall, in the public view, randomly select the additional three members of the commission from the four proposed members submitted under division (B)(2)(a) of this section.

    Categories : Politics
    Comments (0)
    Sep
    21

    In Memphis, a Plea for Regionalism

    Posted by: admin | Comments (0)

    Wharton-cameraRegionalism requires strong dynamic political leadership!
    Read More→

    Categories : Mayors, Regionalism
    Comments (0)

    Recent Comments