Books by A.O. Kime
"Metaphysical realities in America's politically-challenged democracy"
"A sagacious accounting of the Stone Age and the beginnings of civilization"
see more books
U.S. colleges and trade schools
A.O. Kime Articles:
Shoofly Village ruins
Stone Age history
Stone Age timelines
Stone Age tools
Dynamics of now
Evil (nature of)
Gift of life
Light (nature of)
Time (nature of)
Curse of science
Int'l Criminal Court
Rule of law
"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime; abuses its strength, and, by acting on the law of the strongest, breaks up the foundations of society." Thomas Jefferson
A constitutional amendment is urgently needed in Arizona to protect minorities against the whims of the majority in ballot initiatives. As it is, Arizona's constitution cannot protect minorities:
The following WAS an excerpt from "Majority Rule, Minority Rights" on the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of International Information Programs website... but since moved or deleted:
Minorities -- whether as a result of ethnic background, religious belief, geographic location, income level, or simply as the losers in elections or political debate -- enjoy guaranteed basic human rights that no government, and no majority, elected or not, should remove.
Incredibly, as things currently stand, under the Arizona constitution the
voting majority can impose its will on any minority regardless of its descriptive
makeup. This was demonstrated recently in Arizona by the passage of
proposition 203 (2006 tobacco tax initiative) which,
due to the lack of safeguards, then became law.
It goes further, a voter majority within Arizona has the legal authority to impose its will on virtually any issue imaginable. It could:
Vote to outlaw rock-n-roll
Vote to outlaw obesity
Vote to outlaw people from New Jersey
Vote to outlaw Muslims
Vote to raise the minimum wage to $200 per hour
Vote for no taxes
Vote for free ice cream
Vote to reinstate slavery
Vote to lower the pay scale for congressmen to $1.00 per day
Similar to proposition 203 - which forced smokers to pay for the childcare of every needy family within Arizona, even those of non-smokers - the above possibilities could also become law as long as the Arizona legislature (or Governor) is unwilling to amend Article IV of the constitution (see below).
While seemingly commonplace that no state within America will correct a wrong unless forced to do so, being they are the runaway children from the ideals put forth by our founding fathers, thus traitorous bastards isomorphically, what alternatives do citizens have?
While the defeat of proposition 203 would have been a better outcome, a more responsible one - due to the fact citizens are generally limited to complaining to their congressman, staging protests or involving themselves in countermeasure initiatives - perhaps the most effective way to stop majority rule from having its way is to fight fire with fire.
As long as the Arizona legislature and Governor wish to remain comatose... then several silly initiatives would surely make a point. For example, an initiative that all legislators must dress as clowns (endless other possibilities). Since the prevailing dissatisfaction with government is no secret, it ought to pass.
Arizonans could also take advantage of the current situation by passing serious initiatives with meaningful consequences... such as the complete overhaul of state government. We could, if we wanted, gut it almost entirely by making taxation a crime. After all, as proposition 203 has demonstrated, the substance of voter initiatives need not abide by any custom, regulation, law or even the U.S. constitution.
If those actions don't inspire the Arizona legislature to make the first move, then at some point Arizonans will need to circulate a petition for an initiative to amend our state constitution. The following is how it stands today (the portion in need of revision):
Article IV, Legislative Department
Part 1. Initiative and Referendum
(6) (A) [Veto of initiative or referendum] The veto power of the governor shall not extend to an initiative measure approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon or to a referendum measure decided by a majority of the votes cast thereon.
(6) (B) [Legislature's power to repeal initiative or referendum] The legislature shall not have the power to repeal an initiative measure approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon or to repeal a referendum measure decided by a majority of the votes cast thereon.
Incredibly, (6) (A) and (6) (B) do not take into account the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights or federal law... as if they don't exist. A proviso needs to be included.
While certainly worst things than proposition 203 could happen under majority rule, nonetheless it's the issue at hand. Precedent-setting as it is, it poses the question as to whether or not smokers should be considered a minority. However, the answer is clear... targeting a group automatically designates them a 'minority' through the very act of 'distinguishing'. The U.S. Department of State opinion therefore applies.
As things stand, Arizona voters have the power to reinstate slavery, secede
from the Union or, as in Exodus, declare every firstborn summarily slain.
Currently in Arizona, whether race, creed or custom, minorities have no protection
at all from the dangers of majority rule. They only have one comforting thought… that
the majority “probably wouldn’t do such a thing”.
In the end, there is no difference between living under majority rule or that of a king… a situation whereby one must live in fear of the next shoe that drops.
Last modified: 05/04/13