Given the controversy of the Colorado Constitution, and how critics argue that it has placed unintended limits on government funding, what is the best course of action?
| Response | Percent | Votes | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No changes are necessary. Voters have exactly what they intended. | 49% | 60 | |
| Small changes to clarify some of the loopholes. | 25% | 31 | |
| Rewrite the constitution. Look at what the spirit of the law intended and rewrite it to meet that, avoiding all the loopholes the letter of the law creates. | 15% | 19 | |
| Rewrite the constitution. Start it from scratch. | 9% | 11 | |
| Total | 121 | ||
Comments
Craig Daily Press doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Post a comment
Craig Daily Press doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Requires free Craig Daily Press registration.
Commenting requires registration.
Explore Craig
Retail · Recreation & Sporting Goods · Food & Dining · Real Estate & Rentals · Clubs & Organizations · Automotive · Services
Advertisement
Advertisement
9 January 2008 at 5:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
jjcarver (Anonymous) says…
Over the years in this country we have seen the constitution be tory apart by the legistrators and judges that have been in office. Does the constitution really reflect what our forefathers intended it to mean? Every time someone wants to change something they attach it to another bill or something they are really trying to push. In this way all the bills or attachments have taken away many of the rights and liberties that our counstitution was intended to have in order to protect the citizens. Also the constitution has also been intruperated by many judges (while stating the law has been unconstitutional for the case or person or persons they were suppose to be ruling on) to be wrong. Is this really the case or does the constitution only protect the rights on one person or a particular ethinic backgrounds or religion? Only passing small items to fix loopholes or clarifying certian items, I would ask you, Is this a bandaid fix for something that requires stitches? Or is the constitution covered with so many bandaids that it has hidden the real meaning? I will let you be the judge.