4 ms·

No. The United States Constitution is not "only a framework".

tacomonstrous 5y ago
You're good with getting rid of the filibuster then?
wolverine876 5y ago
Could you provide something to backup your statement? As further examples of my point, beyond the laws, legal precedents, customs, and institutions mentioned above: None of the executive branch departments (State, Justice, Defense, Treasury, etc.) are mentioned in the Constitution. No federal court besides the Supreme Court is mentioned. Even specific laws are only loosely defined; for freedom of speech, no provision is made for slander, fraud, harassment, government secrets, etc.; for the right to bear arms, nothing defines what 'arms' are (and I don't suggest we try to define them here). The filibuster and other Congressional rules are not defined. Etc.
- StandardFuture 5y ago
  Exactly Zero of anything you have just said negates the point that was made. Let's reiterate: > Here's what it says in the Constitution: > "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" > Crystal clear. Anything that is not explicitly defined in the Constitution is certainly left up to the interpretation and decisions (within their constitutional authorizations) of the three branches of government. However, anything that is explicit in the constitution cannot be overturned without a constitutional amendment. Hopefully that clears things up for you.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > Exactly Zero Based on experience in Internet forums, I believe we either need to be in a 'curious state' or the conversation isn't worthwhile - in fact, it's a negative - and I think when someone says 'Exactly Zero' of my comment has value, they aren't curious. dang describes a 'curious state' very well: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20curious%20state&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

You're good with getting rid of the filibuster then?

Could you provide something to backup your statement? As further examples of my point, beyond the laws, legal precedents, customs, and institutions mentioned above: None of the executive branch departments (State, Justice, Defense, Treasury, etc.) are mentioned in the Constitution. No federal court besides the Supreme Court is mentioned. Even specific laws are only loosely defined; for freedom of speech, no provision is made for slander, fraud, harassment, government secrets, etc.; for the right to bear arms, nothing defines what 'arms' are (and I don't suggest we try to define them here). The filibuster and other Congressional rules are not defined. Etc.

StandardFuture 5y ago
Exactly Zero of anything you have just said negates the point that was made. Let's reiterate: > Here's what it says in the Constitution: > "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" > Crystal clear. Anything that is not explicitly defined in the Constitution is certainly left up to the interpretation and decisions (within their constitutional authorizations) of the three branches of government. However, anything that is explicit in the constitution cannot be overturned without a constitutional amendment. Hopefully that clears things up for you.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > Exactly Zero Based on experience in Internet forums, I believe we either need to be in a 'curious state' or the conversation isn't worthwhile - in fact, it's a negative - and I think when someone says 'Exactly Zero' of my comment has value, they aren't curious. dang describes a 'curious state' very well: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20curious%20state&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...