From: B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Letter to Ross: Contract to Recall.
Date: 27 Sep 92 16:35:00 GMT

Refs:
{ talk.politics.misc Re: Letter to Ross: Contract to Recall. 1992Sep27     }
{ Organization: Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron, Experiment ZEUS bei HERA }

hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) opinion.
]

]b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice) prior posting.
]|>

]|>                    = How Everyone Can Be involved =
]|>
]|>        (copy of handwritten correspondence sent to Ross Perot)
]
]Pretentious chappie eh? Perhaps I should post the correspondence I have
]with politico types. Question is not what one writes to politicoes but
]whether they reply.
 
Good point Phill, perhaps we'll know tomorrow. Bill Clinton has
incorporated my assertions that the election should be about bringing
the country back together rather than splitting it up in partisan
division. {re. The Politics of Love vs. The Politics of Division}

I hope Ross Perot will make a similar overture to the delegations from
both the Democratic camp and the Republican camp that are meeting here
tomorrow with Ross and the UWS movement. If they'll all compromise on 
=spending cuts=, perhaps we can put this winner take all election 
nonsense behind us and form a coalition government. (Quayle bows out
and Bill becomes George's Veep. ;^)

Sure would like to see them put their promises in a public contract
though...

]|>        Need you to publically agree to a legally binding contract
]|>        to submit to =Recall= when elected. The recall option
]|>        if ever needed, would be put in effect by general consensus
]|>        through mail-in "votes."
]
]There could be no binding contract in US law with the constitution
]written as it is at present.
 
Your conjecture Phill. If candidate "Q" enters into a legal agreement
with his constinuency to resign on a `vote' of no-confidence, then
certainly "Q" should resign when that occurs -- without being forced
to step down legally -- if he honors his written word that is. However,
the legal statement will stand, I have no doubt. It happens everyday.
 
I used "recall" only to bring to mind a commonly held notion of
politics. A separate legal contract can work similarly.

The point is that the public can enter into legal contract with the
candidates as a separate matter to get a *real and binding assurance*
that they will do what they promise. We do the same with plumbers and
house builders, so it'll work with candidates too. Why bother listening
to lip service, and hollow promises, when it's taken for granted that
politicians lie -- and when there's an obvious well proven alternative.

So if you thought I was suggesting something about election law, my
apologies. Needless to say then, your other point is moot.

]|>        Most importantly, by being open to =everyone= in America,
]|>        it does more to overcome "alienation" than any other gesture.
]|>        Kids and Foreign Nationals included.
]
]Good heavens! Tice offering me a vote in the US. Err no thanks old
]chap, like the New York marathon I prefer to speculate than participate.

As to speculation, you should check-out the Mexican NAFTA Stocks.

As to offering you a vote -- sorry no: (a) you're not a US resident,
and (b) registering an opinion concerning an issue is not the same
thing as an election vote.

]Phill Hallam-Baker

   |
-- J --
   |     Stephen D. Tice
   |     Arlington Texas

]Ps just come back from a conference where amongst other things we
]discussed the SSC data aquisition system. The consensus was that its a
]problem we can solve with no significant difficulties using todays
]technology.
 
Happy to hear it -- did they mention how much it would cost?? If
it only takes a capability comparable to the existing supercomputing
facility of the NSA -- it would be interesting to have some idea how
much such an expense is?  ("Black budgets" considered.)
 
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc