Pending Motions

Motion 1:
Posted: May 21, 2006
Seconded: May 21, 2006
Closing Date for Voting: November 2, 2006

YesNo

View All Votes for This Motion

I move that the words “between the ages of sixteen and eighteen” be removed from ARTICLE II — MEMBERSHIP, Section 1, which currently reads: “Eligibility for membership: Application for voting membership shall be open to registered voters in Nevada’s Second Congressional District, and on a restricted basis to prospective voters in the district between the ages of sixteen and eighteen. Membership is granted free of charge after registration online at Nevada Vote Direct.”

And, in ARTICLE II — MEMBERSHIP, Section 2, the sentence that currently reads, “Restricted members may not vote on pending legislation.” shall be amended to read: “Restricted members may vote on pending legislation, but their votes shall be recorded separately, and shall not be binding on Mr. Rosen’s votes in Congress.”

This Motion involves a change in Nevada Vote Direct Bi-Laws, and therefore requires a YES vote by two-thirds of the membership.

3 Responses to “Motion 1”

  1. Daniel Rosen Says:
    May 21st, 2006 at 8:26 pm

    Although I seconded this Motion as a courtesy to one of our members, I do not actually think that it would be a good idea for this motion to be approved. I could be wrong, and I think the idea has certain merits, so it is best that the entire membership consider the question. The member asked me to frame the Motion and I am happy to do it. However, it seems to me that only registered voters in our district ought to be able to vote on Legislative Motions at Nevada Vote Direct. This is for several reasons.

    • First, registering to vote demonstrates that one takes seriously our duty as citizens to vote. Now, I understand that some people have very good reasons not to vote. They understand that the system is basically rigged by big-moneyed special interests, so that voting has become just an empty form in our corrupted democracy. The member who asked for this motion had these people in mind, and he would like to welcome them back into the voting system through the auspices of Nevada Vote Direct. As I say, this reason has merit. By the way, I do not personally judge anybody who has decided to opt out of the system. I have been tempted to do so myself. Corruption by definition means that participation is a waste of time. But, after all, it is this very corruption that we are trying to correct at Nevada Vote Direct.
    • Second, in order to succeed with Nevada Vote Direct, we need to attract a very large number of supporters who are qualified to vote for me in November. Therefore, in every way that we can, we have to try to encourage all of our supporters to be sure to register to vote, so that they may then vote for me in the general election. Requiring that people should be registered voters before they become members of Nevada Vote Direct is one way of doing this.
    • Third, the easiest way to verify that our members are adults living in our district is to check our list against the public list of registered voters.

      • For these reasons, I hope that the members will vote NO on this Motion.

  2. Sophie Says:
    May 21st, 2006 at 8:35 pm

    I agree, and I also hope that members will vote NO.

  3. Nevada Vote Direct » Archive » Two-Tier Membership Says:
    June 1st, 2006 at 5:55 pm

    […] The following Motion has been made and seconded.Please click here to discuss or vote on the motion. […]