Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Bull-Fucking-Shit (Score 1) 771

Just for the sake of pedantic accuracy, the process is as follows:

2/3 of both houses of Congress approve an amendment;
A Constitutional Convention is called which then proposes amendments.

After one of those two things has occurred, 3/4 of the states must ratify the proposed amendment.

I say this mainly to combat the myth that a constitutional convention could unilaterally change the constitution without subsequent approval by the states. It couldn't. The convention is an end-run around Congress, not around the states.

Comment High hopes, for sure (Score 5, Insightful) 596

The last time I saw a response to one of these petitions, it was one for the elimination of the TSA. The response was written by the head of the TSA. Not to say you shouldn't push the button anyway. If the Obama administration is going to ask for our input and then blatantly disregard it, we may as well have them on record as doing so.

Comment Re:Victory For Freedom (Score 5, Insightful) 853

I hate to break it to the corporatist crowd, but the ISPs built those networks with our money, from government subsidies. They received those subsidies to enhance our national infrastructure. If monopolists have the same property rights as everyone else, the free market dies. And if monopolists control infrastructure without oversight to ensure equal access, democracy dies.

Comment Re:collective insanity (Score 1) 836

Mod parent up! He's exactly right. Any voting system where you select exactly one of N candidates is doomed to devolve into a two-candidate two-party system, on whatever scale the system is applied. It literally can not be any other way. We need to switch to Schulze voting, or at least IRV, to eliminate the clone-dependence hell we're in now. What's more, this is something we can do. Several cities in the US have already adopted IRV on a local level. This can be done from the ground up, instead of trying to do it from the top down. Expecting Washington to reform election law is a long wait for a train don't come.

Submission + - Pirate Party Candidate Accurately Quoted by Paper (

ZOmegaZ writes: Tennessee has some of the strictest ballot access laws in the nation. Two and a half years after three political parties filed suit, a federal court has ruled that these laws are unconstitutionally restrictive. The Tennessean, Nashville's local paper, ran a front-page article about the subject, including quotes from Stephen Collings. Collings is running for US House in the Tennessee fifth, and is one of the first candidates to be endorsed by the US Pirate Party.

Full disclosure: ZOmegaZ is Stephen Collings.

Comment Re:The business model isn't completely dead with t (Score 1) 362

Weird Al Yankovic stated that he was happy for either avenue his customers used to buy music, but his take per track on iTunes was about two cents a track and his take on CDs was about 26 cents- which is pretty major if you want to support the artist.

Of course, if you're buying tracks off the CDs they don't make any more, it's the difference between some profit and none.

Comment The problem is high costs (Score 2, Interesting) 2044

The fundamental problem with the American healthcare system is its high cost. That's why so many people don't have coverage, and that's why attempting universal coverage right now is going to cost so much more than it should. Universal access is a noble goal, but far better to lower costs first. This report does an excellent job of breaking down exactly where we spend more money than the rest of the world. My platform is based around lowering costs in four areas: administrative costs, prescription drugs, malpractice insurance, and practitioner conflict of interest. Based on that report, my proposals would lower the average American's health care costs by over $1000 per year, without requiring any new federal spending or expansion of government power.

If I can figure all this out in my spare time, you know Congress has to know it too. Which means either A) I'm horribly wrong, or B) both parties define the problem differently than I do. Which raises the question, exactly what do they see as the problem?

Slashdot Top Deals

At these prices, I lose money -- but I make it up in volume. -- Peter G. Alaquon