By Steven L. Taylor
Yesterday I noted that the initial report presented to the Constitutional Court in Colombia regarding the process that could lead to a referendum on re-election in Colombia was reported to be “negative.”
Today, El Tiempo published excerpts from the report (Esta es la ponencia de Humberto Sierra Porto que dice ‘no’ al referendo reeleccionista) which are summarized below.
The basics needed to understand the following: one method of amending the Colombian constitution is a petition drive that would trigger a constitutional vote and then a Constitutional Court review and, if approved, a referendum. The process derives from the Colombian Constitution of 1991, the procedures of which are defined by legislation (Law 134 of 1994).
Problems with the process being considered by the Court:
1. The language on the petition differs from that passed by the Congress. The specific language was altered in Senate committee, which raises the issue of whether the legislation passed and the referendum question that would be on the ballot comports with the petition drive.
2. The petition drive cost six times the legal limit for such a process.
3. Five of the votes in the Chamber of Representatives may be invalid due to suspensions of the congresistas in question. Without those votes, the measure did not pass the lower house.
4. Extraordinary sessions of Congress used to debate and pass the legislation enabling the referendum were illegally called.
Now, it is up to the Court to determine whether these assertions are valid or not and therefore whether the legislation (Law 1354 of 2009) is constitutional or not.
Quite frankly, it doesn’t look too good for the referendum taking place, but we shall see.
The story also note some key dates:
March 12 is the last day that candidates not participating in party primaries on the 14th can register their candidacies. Significant if anything because Uribe would not be participating in a primary.
March 13: the likely date for the referendum, if it is allowed to go forward.
March 14: congressional elections and party primaries (for those parties utilizing this option).
May 30: first round of presidential elections (second round held only if not candidate receives an absolute majority).
Share on Facebook
Sphere: Related Content
By Steven L. Taylor
The NPR write-up noted below contains the following from the Q&A session last night:
The speech lasted just over 40 minutes, but it was followed by 20 minutes of conversation with conference organizer Judson Phillips, who read questions submitted in advance to the conference Web site.
We all know about the Obama plan, Philips read to Palin. What, he asked, is the Palin plan?
"My plan is quite simple," Palin answered. "To support those who support the foundation of our country when it comes to the economy. It is free market principles that reward hard work and personal responsibility."
And on national security: "It’s easy to just kind of sum it up by repeating Ronald Reagan when he talked about the Cold War and we can apply it to our war on terrorism. We win. They lose, and we do all we can to win."
Those are, at best, campaign slogans, not plans. Now one can charitably note that in a Q&A session that one cannot elucidate complicated policy proposals. Yet, on the other, one has to be able to suggest something beyond “free markets,” “hard work,” and “we win, they lose”—is anyone actually opposed to such things?
If only governing were that simple—but of course, a lot of people think that it is (despite the mountain of empirical evidence that suggests otherwise).
Share on Facebook
Sphere: Related Content
By Steven L. Taylor
It would appear that Palin’s speech last night to the National Tea Party convention was a great success. However, this should have been the expected outcome, yes? To date her most successful political moment was a pre-prepared, red-meat speech to a friendly audience (i.e., her speech to RNC accepting her nomination to run as Veep). As such, the opportunity to give a similar speech to a crowd even more hungry for her style of conservative populism was tailor-made for her. Dave Weigel at the Washington Independent has a number of sound bites from here speech here: Palin Speaks: ‘How’s that Hopey-Changey Thing Working Out for Ya? (a brilliant line for the crowd in question, btw). See also the NPR story which includes an audio version.. This speech will only solidify her popularity with a significant portion of the Republican base.
I continue to maintain that she is planning a 2012 run at the GOP nomination (although I am willing to entertain the alternative hypothesis that she is creating a long-term media career for herself). That she can build a following is not the issue, of course (we already knew that she could), the operative issue is whether she can build a movement large enough to a) win the nomination and then b) to win the presidency. I have severe doubts of her ability to do a) and think it essentially impossible that she could do b).
Share on Facebook
Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, February 6, 2010
By Steven L. Taylor
Motion
While not 100% what I wanted (my son is not quite as sharply in focus as I would like). I was pleased with the shot, as it was something I was trying to capture. That is: a panning shot with him in motion and framed by everyone else in a blur. One thing is for sure: the lighting in the gym stinks.
Share on Facebook
Sphere: Related Content
By Steven L. Taylor
By Steven L. Taylor
Next Page »
Drought? Of football, but spring training is just around the corner for baseball Doc, it can’t get here fast enough. I have about had all the hockey I can take.
Comment by Talmadge East — Sunday, February 7, 2010 @ 10:18 pm