Final Constitution of the 5th Constitutional Convention
Crucians In Focus invites the public to review and comment on the attached Final Constitution of the 5th Constitutional Convention which was approved on May 26, 2009 at The Drive In (Estate Grove Place, St. Croix).
Final Constitution of the 5th Constitutional Convention
The document has been forwarded to the governor who has 10 days to forward it to President Obama. The President then has 60 days to review and forward it to the Congress with his comments. Congress then has 60 days to review the document and either return it as is or modify/amend the document, in whole or in part, as per Public Law 94-584 (full text; previously provided by Delegate Emmanuel in an opinion article). The document returned by Congress will be submitted to the people of the Virgin Islands for approval.
I have heard about this issue of a delegate calling in from jail several times. I do not know what is the big issue. The convention came up with their own rules that allowed them to vote from cellphone. Additionally, since some of you throw U.S. law in the face of others; I hope you remember that said delegate is innocent until proven guilty! You simply can’t have it both ways.
Since the USVI are part of the United States and not an independent country, US law does apply. My comment had nothing to do with guilt or innocence but more about whether he knew what he was voting for. As I understand it many changes were made the day of the vote. He was not present to hear all of the changes and simply voted as instructed. In any case it is now another failed attempt at a constitution. A waste of money.
old fart your name tells it all,I think the governor should of let the voting public vote on this matter just like we voted for the delegates. the governor was not voted a delegate,so his input should of been about sending the document to the president for review and not him stoping the process. i hope MR.JAMES and the other delegates challenges the governor and take this matter to court.as for you governor JOHN DE WOLF 2010 is right around the corner,when you loose you and MARCAS can sit in MC DONALD and shoot the brezee, we surely won’t miss you on st. croix. so i say to you MR. DE WOLF fair well good luck in finding a job,maybe you can work on the landfill for charlie trucking the same company you almost sent banckrupt.
I think that deJongh is doing a better job than Turnbull did. He inherited a lot of problems and he is working his way through the one’s he can fix. There are many problems that are difficult to fix. The biggest problem is that we have too many government employees for our population. Too much government money goes to salaries instead of supplies and maintenance. Look at the roads and schools on St Croix.
The governor might not be a delegate but the law required him to review the document and pass it to the president. If he was not expected to do anything then why didn’t the document go straight from the convention to the president. The document was an embarrassment in many ways and the governor rightfully killed it.
ANYONE BUT DICTATOR JOHN!!!!!!!
ok ROGER MORGAN first of all when TURNBULL left office there was 9,300 government employees to date as GOVERNOR DE WOLF sits in office there are over 13,000 employees second,the document was an embarrassment for only his special interest group like you and restore hope.oh i meant destroy hope,these VIRGIN ISLAND OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA are here for everyone to enjoy,raise a family,make your living,and live freely but my belief is that the native,and most of all ancestrial native VIRGIN ISLANDER SHOULD have a right to have something they can call their own. NO ONE should be allowed to come from the outside to tell us how to run our government or tell us who we should elect. LIKE i said eariler the name OLD FART tells it all.
We seem to be overlooking several points. The Legislature will be embarrassed when the courts rule they can’t legislate that the Constitution must adopt the non-controversial portions of the fourth draft when creating the fifth. First of all, who defines controversial? Secondly, only the Convention can craft the Constitution. The Legislature can’t decide what should or shouldn’t be in the document.
The Governor will also be embarrassed when the courts ultimately rule against him, unfortunately he’ll already be on his second term considering how many in the Virgin Islands are celebrating his dictatorial actions of halting the Constitution.
Stall it as much as you like, the document will be in the hands of Congress eventually. From the weak education campaign, to the bungled election of delegates, the lack of funding or access to government property for meetings and other support functions, to the current actions of the Governor, the Constitution has faced a steep uphill climb. Fortunately, the rule of law will ultimately prevail.
OldFart this is what you said “The governor might not be a delegate but the law required him to review the document and pass it to the president. If he was not expected to do anything then why didn’t the document go straight from the convention to the president. The document was an embarrassment in many ways and the governor rightfully killed it.”
That is the problem! Does the public law actually give Gov. DeJongh the authority to review the document? One thing for certain is that the law does require the Gov. to pass the document on to the President. However the twist is that he should pass on a document that complies with section 2 (?). Who makes such a determination? Perhaps there are some embarassing sections in the constitution, but there are ways to amend. Congress could have amended the document, also.
I think the Governor over-stepped his authority. I am trying to obtain the legislative history on the applicable public law to see if I can understand what Congress was thinking about when they poorly constructed the statute.
In my opinion, the Governor represents the territory as the chief executive of the territory and that is the only reason he’s identified in Public Law 94-584 as the individual to deliver the Constitution to the President. It’s only a matter of time before the courts put him in his place.
Listening to the morning talk shows, it’s sad but expected that many well-intentioned callers are running their opinions on raw emotion, with little or no intelligence behind their rant. What they say may sound good, smart and sexy, but there is no substance to support their thoughts. Unfortunately, listeners that play with only half a deck will take these emotional outbursts as gospel and run with it. Halfway down the road they might slow down and say, “Hey, wait a minute…” but by then it’s too late.
Ignorance kills.
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER:
Should one person have been able to stall what the representatives of the peoople produced in the draft? Were the majority of the people robbed of the opportunity to vote (pursuant to law) to make a decision about the draft constitution?
If the document was deemed constitutionally sound by the Governor and was forwarded to the Federal government who thereafter edited it what should be the stance of the people?
Haven’t all governors, when acting on proposed legislation from the Legislature, express their displeasure with specific sections in their memoranda while allowing the Act to become law or while making recommendations for changes?
For those who are against granting any “special” right to any particular group: Aren’t there currently certain groups of people who enjoy certain benefits that the majority of people don’t enjoy but wish they could?
For example, at the beginning of every month:
Arent’ certain individuals able to fill their shopping carts HIGH with hundreds of dollars worth of groceries, using funds they didn’t work for.
In many cases, don’t the same individuals receive subsidised housing? In many cases don’t the same individuals receive free or subsidised health care?
Are some of us really opposed to special benefits for some or are there other issues at play here?
Ten Again – That is an interesting point.
I have no issue with the Ancestral/Native Virgin Islands exceptions. However, I will not object to Congress or anyone that has authority to amend the constitution to remove those clauses. I am fully in support of the process.
Now, why don’t people complain about the benefits that Ten Again mentioned and those of the EDC? Note, I do dnot have a problem with the EDC benefits. My issue is that we shouldn’t give them to every Tom, Dick and Harry, FOREVER. As a result, I agree with the clause concerning limiting the time-frame for obtaining those benefits. I strongly believe that many, perhaps the majority, of the EDC beneficiaries aren’t really returning a comparable benefit to the territory. Plus, there are loopholes that need to be closed.
* Comment removed by moderator due to offensive content.
Ms Petersen I had quite a bit of respect for you and your opinions until your statement concerning ****-*****. Your comment does not belong in this forum. You need to take that to the gut.
Most people that live under the oppression of a dictator would choose a homo sexual over having little or no freedoms. As a matter of fact Ms Petersen “Homosexuality” is a free chioce made by many in The US Virgin Islands
Dear Ms. Petersen,
You had me until you called our former Governor a ****-*****. These kinds of comments have no place in this forum and you should be ashamed of yourself for referring to him as such. We might all “agree to disagree” with one another, but we should refrain from nasty, personal attacks.
Moreover, how can you speak out against the discrimination of any group and then resort to this kind of name calling? I ask that the moderators of this forum please moderate these comments. Disgusting!
ms. petersen are you really a school teacher? if you are one, i can see why our children are failing. you are the worst piece of cow down that lives on st. croix.we should take you into the cow pasture so they can #2 on you,we crucians are so ashame of you. let me inform you from now you will never be a senator or a leader in these VIRGIN ISLANDS OF THE UNITED STATES.
Why are you guys surprised! There has been a barage of personal attacked directed at a number of people by that same poster. I guess it only matters when she attacks a former Governor that may be a homosexual. Give me a break.
And just look at all of us go after one another! Every time someone tries to redirect us back to the point of this comment section, off go the personal attacks. Are we fighting one another? Isn’t this to be a forum for intelligent discussion, or is this just a high school free-for-all?
The matter of the draft constitution is now before the District court. Let’s see what’s the outcome. Meantime, are any of us willing to reconcile our positions based on a healthy discourse? Are we willing to compromise or agree that many of us may be partial in our views, particularly with regards to special rights?
Our veterans brothers and sisters receive special benefits. Our senior family, friends, and others recieve special benefits. If you work for certain organizations, you and your family can receive free or reduced higher education. If you are considered economically deprived you could be eligible for WIC, food stamp, housing assistance, and free or reduced health benefits.
We have been giving special benefits to individuals in our community for years. Therefore, what is different this time with the provisions proposed by the drafters of the constitution?
What is it about these that is causing the contentions? Is it the “crab in a barrel” mentality? Or is it that we believe that the provisions have gone too far? Do we believe that the descendants of ancestrial natives should recieve any benefit at all? If we do, then what should it be? If they shouldn’t, why shouldn’t they?
I do not think that you can fix past injustices by putting new injustice in place.
My ancestors fought and died in the American Revolution, should I receive benefits in the US that people who cannot trace their roots back to the Revolution do not?
How would you like to move to the US and have someone tell you that you have to pay taxes that I don’t or that you can’t vote on certain issues in elections because you were not born there.
Remember there are more Ancestrial Native Virgin Islanders living in the US than there are living in the USVI.
The idea that someone can vote in an election based on ancestry rather than place of residence is absurd.
Do you think that if the Governor had passed the document on to the President and Congress along with a note that said he felt that this document is unconstitutional and ill conceived that the results would be any different?
Do you think that even if we wasted more money putting this attempt at a constitution to a vote that it would fare any better than the first four attempts.
The demographics today make it even less likely to pass than past votes. I read somewhere that Ancestrial Natives and descendants only make up 40% of the voters today and who else would vote for this constitution?