<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Really Big Changes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709</link>
	<description>Michigan People, Politics, and Policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 01:01:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Wholihan</title>
		<link>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709#comment-4544</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Wholihan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 23:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domemagazine.com/blogs/?p=879#comment-4544</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s fun and interesting (and scary) to look at all the possibilities that could happen with a constitutional convention. The main thing for us to ask ourselves is this. 

1. Is the constitutional structure the major problem? 

2. Is it part of the constitutional structure the major problem in state government? 

3. Are the legislators and governor&#039;s administrators - the people -  the major problem in state government?

If the answer is 1, then a con-con is the least worst solution. 

If the answer is 2, then it can be changed by amendment. 

If the answer is 3, than a con-con is the worst possible solution because the people will still be in the legislature,  and barring sweeping changes, likely similar people, probably not subject to campaign finance laws, chosen in a low turnout special election, who are term limited out after one term, will be the ones making the decisions on the new constitution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s fun and interesting (and scary) to look at all the possibilities that could happen with a constitutional convention. The main thing for us to ask ourselves is this. </p>
<p>1. Is the constitutional structure the major problem? </p>
<p>2. Is it part of the constitutional structure the major problem in state government? </p>
<p>3. Are the legislators and governor&#8217;s administrators &#8211; the people &#8211;  the major problem in state government?</p>
<p>If the answer is 1, then a con-con is the least worst solution. </p>
<p>If the answer is 2, then it can be changed by amendment. </p>
<p>If the answer is 3, than a con-con is the worst possible solution because the people will still be in the legislature,  and barring sweeping changes, likely similar people, probably not subject to campaign finance laws, chosen in a low turnout special election, who are term limited out after one term, will be the ones making the decisions on the new constitution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beverly williams</title>
		<link>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709#comment-4069</link>
		<dc:creator>beverly williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:25:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domemagazine.com/blogs/?p=879#comment-4069</guid>
		<description>I agree with your a, c, d and e.  B should be one rep per county and forget the districts!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with your a, c, d and e.  B should be one rep per county and forget the districts!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Ballenger</title>
		<link>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709#comment-3027</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Ballenger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domemagazine.com/blogs/?p=879#comment-3027</guid>
		<description>Craig: As to the three options you say Michigan voters will face in 2010,  remember what our old friend Woody Hayes used to say in defending his preference for the running game: &quot;The forward pass? Only three things can happen --- and two of them are BAD!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig: As to the three options you say Michigan voters will face in 2010,  remember what our old friend Woody Hayes used to say in defending his preference for the running game: &#8220;The forward pass? Only three things can happen &#8212; and two of them are BAD!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jackie DiGiovanni</title>
		<link>http://domemagazine.com/blogs/craigsgrist/cr0709#comment-2974</link>
		<dc:creator>Jackie DiGiovanni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 15:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domemagazine.com/blogs/?p=879#comment-2974</guid>
		<description>&quot;Special interest groups&quot; are always vilified. They are the people who don&#039;t agree with what you think. If we are grown-up enough to hold forth honest debate and discussion, respect everyone&#039;s right to their opinion, feel comfortable and safe enough to express our opinion, we may accomplish some of the many things our State legislators have been unable to do. If we sit back and do nothing because we don&#039;t have the time or the energy or the interest, then we will get the government we deserve. We already have the government we deserve. What do you want to change for the better?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Special interest groups&#8221; are always vilified. They are the people who don&#8217;t agree with what you think. If we are grown-up enough to hold forth honest debate and discussion, respect everyone&#8217;s right to their opinion, feel comfortable and safe enough to express our opinion, we may accomplish some of the many things our State legislators have been unable to do. If we sit back and do nothing because we don&#8217;t have the time or the energy or the interest, then we will get the government we deserve. We already have the government we deserve. What do you want to change for the better?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

