Would You Vote For Or Against The European Constitution?

[mermaid]

Poll question: Would You Vote For Or Against The European Constitution?

[Stinky The Clown]

1. Please, please, please, please ... let there be another superpower

to balance the insanity that's overtaken ours.

[Mass]

2. Pb is the Constitution is just another way to help Corporations.

When they will include labor rights in this Constitution, may be I support it. For now, though I am a strong supporter of an European Union, I really dont think it is worth supporting a Constitution that creates an Europe of the Corporations rather than an Europe of the Citizens.

[gandalf]

4. Exactly.

Here in Germany, I guess that 2% of the population know the content of the Constitution, because the content is not discussed at all in Germany (except for some technical things like voting rules). The fact that it is much fore friendly to corporations and stresses civil rights to a lesser extent than our German Grundgesetz is not known to many.
However, if there were a plebiscite, it could mean problems for the Constitution. And that's one of the reasons why we, the people, are not asked.

[Mass]

7. France may vote NO

Maastritch (sp) passed with a very short majority and right now, between people being fed up with Chirac and people really opposing some of the things in the Constitution, this is not a done deal.

[DFLer4edu]

10. No is at 52 percent

That is why I asked mermaid to creat the poll actually. I can't creat polls so mermaid kindly did it for me. The current polling shows the no at 52 percent which means the yes has gained some ground, but that the no is still in the lead.

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-631760,36-641304@51-632597,0.html

[DFLer4edu]

14. Europe of the corporations has already been created

A no will stop a Europe of the Citizens from ever being created. I agree with you that the constitution gives too much to corporations, but a no to the constitution will leave the Europe of the corporations in place while destroying the chances of a politically united Europe.

[kenny blankenship]

32. Very Good Point

Without political union, corporations are free to play divide and conquer. (That's what they do to Americans playing one state off against the others) The corporations have ways of associating across borders for their benefit, to magnify their power; without a political unification of different EU countries into a sovereign power there can be no counterbalance to corporate joint actions for the people and workers.

[Concerned Prude]

21. I agree, and will be voting no

An EU constitution is a decent idea in principle, but this one is way too geared towards creating as hospitable an environment as possible for corporations and entrenching their power. I'll be voting no if it even gets as far as a referendum in Britain, which it wont if the French vote no (I think). They can get back to me when, if ever, they decide to start giving a stuff about working people.

[Dr Zoidberg]

27. I'm against it for the same reason.

But even if the French vote yes, I really think Blair is going to struggle badly selling this to the British. And of course if Howard wins, he wont even try to sell it to them...

[ck4829]

3. I concur

I love the United States and that is why I am hoping that another Superpower will come along and compete with the Beast that has taken over our government.

[DFLer4edu]

8. I want another superpwer, but for a different reason

I want another superpower to be an ally to future democratic administrations, especially as China becomes more and more powerful.

[robcon]

5. I don't know all the issues....

but I've read that the left and the right are against the constitution, but, of course for different reasons.

[DFLer4edu]

12. The French Socialists are officially for the constitution

though you are right that there are many from the left and the right who are against it. Le Pen (the leader of the extreme right party) has actually kept his campaign for the yes on the low side so as not to throw the left wingers towards the yes.

[Mass]

22. But there are dissenters even in the French Socialists

particularly when it comes to their left wing.

[DFLer4edu]

23. I've got news for you, there are always disssenters among the Socialists

which is why they are stuck with Chirac.

[Mass]

25. Pas nouveau pour moi, mais merci.

I know, I was just stating the obvious for those who just dont know about France's political landscape. Most of my family is Socialist and they are still very on the fence on what to vote on this issue. This is a difficult issue and most people dont really understand it.

[DFLer4edu]

33. Understood

If I could vote I'd vote for the constitution, but I wouldn't be happy about. They've got good reasons not to be happy about the constitution. It is a difficult issue and as you said it isn't something easy to understand. I know I don't understand the damn thing. I flipped through the constitution and in general I found that every political party in France would agree the thing is unreadable and that's saying something. The only thing I know is that although a no is technically a no to the constitution it is really a no to Europe.

[Igel]

6. Against.

Constitutions should be short, whether for a country or an organization. Typically the laws/bylaws constitute a much larger body of text.

If you have a 600 page constitution ... ?

Let the bylaws or legislation work out the details. A large constitution both obscures what the basic rules are, and that opens the door to a lot of mischief.

[DFLer4edu]

13. I'm for it, but I agree with you that it is a terrible constitution

The constitution is ridiculously huge and unreadable, but the question isn't whether or not you are for the constitution, it is whether you would vote for it. If the French vote no it will be a disaster for the EU.

[Igel]

29. I usually vote against things I'm against.

(Although, oddly enough, I really do mean "usually"--I've voted for things I thought were a horrible idea. Sometimes to spite the idiots; other times, in committees, so I could later move to revisit the question, which under Roberts rules can only be done by somebody on the winning side.)

I'd send it back to committee. If the French vote non, the EU continues as it is, the policy wonks will go back to the table, change some punctuation, and try again.

[aneerkoinos]

18. Treaty

To be exact, it's a Constitutional Treaty, to replace thousands of pages of legal text. It's in four parts, and only the first part is the actual "Constitution". One part is the European Human Rights Charter, that has been around for years. Rest is more or less bylaws and details.

[Igel]

30. That helps explain part of it, tx

common man.

[aneerkoinos]

35. So

It's not just Greek to you, then! :hi:

[Selatius]

9. If there are no environmental/worker protections, then I'd vote no

The French people should not be submitted to a campaign of pressure to ratify the Constitution. Instead, the issues the French people have with the Constitution should be put on the table for all to see and for all to discuss. That is the only way it should be done.

[murdoch]

20. Yes, they shouldn't vote for it

I would also like to see a United Europe, but not in this manner. The constitution was written for and by large corporations although not on the level of the US. But it is bad enough. The French workers vetoing it is a positive development, just as their veto of Bush's war and the general strike in 1968 were.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. What are the parts of the constitution that are pro-corporation?

Especially as compared with the current situation - which will continue if the constitution is rejected?

[Dob Bole]

11. against, bigtime...

First of all, there is a huge "Democratic Deficit" in the EU...the people don't have very much of a say in EU affairs. They elect people who appoint people who appoint other people, and so on...

I haven't read the entire proposed Constitution, but it seems that the EU operates pretty well as a confederacy...so no need to fix what isn't broke.

[Henny Penny]

16. I'm all for a strong united Europe.

A Superpower that doesn't spend all its money on the military, but rather on education, health care, public transport etc.

"First of all, there is a huge "Democratic Deficit" in the EU...the people don't have very much of a say in EU affairs. They elect people who appoint people who appoint other people, and so on..."

Isn't that what happens in the US? The people can be so opposed to one candidate that they are prepared to vote for a dead man, but still the loser gets appointed to the govt!!!

[aneerkoinos]

17. Not logical

If your problem is the so called "Democratic Defict", then it makes no sense to oppose the Constitution, which would mean support for the current system. The Constitution increases the powers of the Parliament, creates new route for direct democracy (citizen initiative, see my post below), and makes the system more transparent and understandable (compared to current situation).

What comes to separation of powers, EU system much better than US, where one party has been able to take control of all the three branches, literally 200 years ahead.

[fedsron2us]

26. Democratic deficit

I could not have put it better. The EU's main failing is that it essentially run by a small group of professional political apparatiks who do not necessarily reflect the vierws of the populace. Granted this elite is not as enslaved to corporate interests as that of the US political classes but you can be sure big business is trying to change that situation. If any thing the EU consitution is going to speed that process by removing some of the checks that the current system of vetos supplies. In reality Europe is never going to be a super state because national differences are always going to make agreements on almost any major area of policy difficult. Attempts to force unity are bound to fail. It is far better to accept that its most useful role is as political and economic forum where historic enemies can work out their problems in a peaceful manner.

[aneerkoinos]

15. Qualified yes

My complaints are the same as French, it should be stronger on the Social agenda, and much less neoliberal tones.

But it will be lot better than the Nice agreement, and I like the EU citizen initiative for referendum with million signatories, that may turn out to be very usefull weapon in changing EU.

[rfkrfk]

19. I don't like the motto, United in diversity

page 222, English version, July 18, 2003
Nice music and flag, however.

could someone explain article 4-7.4, last clause, page 224,
'revising constitution'
'the matter shall be referred to the European Council'
,
,the council can change the terms for revising?

[ComerPerro]

28. I really don't know enough about it

[SGBL]

31. It was a good thing when discussed years ago

However, the american corporations somehow (I am STILL trying to figure out how... masterful work) managed to bend it to their will in all of europe. Now the EU constitution will screw all citizens of europe while helping the corporations move in. Europe would be well advised to be on guard at this point - otherwise the BBC will be replaced with FOX news, mass media consolidation will occur, and right wingers will gain office all across europe. It will be a horrible situation.

[xchrom]

34. american corporate interests are against it.

as well as the pnac crowd, conservative christians and republicans.

it's not perfect -- but it balances the current inevitability of a u.s./china dominance in the world.

the e.u. constitution can be changed -- if the political will among the people is there later.

it seems to me that is an excellent role for the socialists to take on.

i think a no vote will result in an uglier world for the foreseeable future.

[sweetheart]

36. whatever

The european union already exists in law, a massive collective
document of some 800,000 pages. The constitution is an attempt to
simplify this as new members enter the union. In this regard, I
support the principal of making the institution clear, more democratically
answerable to the people it represents and things like that,
something that is rather wanting in the existing model.

That said, when it comes to a referendum, i'll read the text... if
it gets that far. The constitution has to pass its first hurdle in
the nation that drafted the bloody thing. If it can't pass there, i
am not inclined to read things that are never going to exist.

It worries me when they try to create a state of common criminal laws
with extraditing from one nation to another for what might not be
crimes in some places. There have been several cases of this already
in europe, even one where a german cartoonist was indicted under
greek heresy laws for making cartoons about jesus. This has been
extended to drugs and other things where i don't agree at all, and
think it wiser to keep the police state thing out of it.

In this sense, i'm against closer integration, and as france is a big
police state sort of country, for imprisoning cannabis smokers and
such, their political sense is not very smart... and we'll see if
the voters are smarter. A giant federal police state, that
creepingly federalizes choice could wind up just as evil as the US
federal... which would be no victory... so i'm very very cautious
and concerned about blair and his police state thinking. In this
sense, if europe comes to be under his vision, i'm concerned. If it
comes under teh vision of the spanish socialists, i'll feel much
better.

There is the political ego problem of france, wanting to keep its
control in an expanding EU... and if this constitution fails, the
next one, will not be france-german centric, and the influence that
france currently holds will only decline if this one is rejected.
There is, then, for those who want to jetteson the old school of
europe being a 2-speed club, the interest of having this current
constitution get a non... and a re-write.

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. Talking of the cartoonist

is he actually going to be extradited? This report said:
"Haderer's lawyers have appealed against the sentence which can only be imposed if Haderer travels to Greece."
If that's true, then the EU really doesn't have much to do with it - any country can try someone in absentia (like Jordan convicted Ahemd Chalabi of fraud - so he's never been back there).

He's Austrian, by the way, if anyone feels like finding a news story that would be definitive on whether he's going to be forced to go to Greece.

[sweetheart]

40. Ok, german, austrian

My german spouse reminds me that hitler was austrian.

I was obviously wrong about "extradition" but i'm obviously paranoid
about it, as pretty soon they'll be extraditing cannabis smokers from
the nederlands to france to be imprisoned, or because a french person
bought a bag of weed in amsterdam over the weekend.

I've no problem with real felony police cooperation, but this is then
turned to their criminal war on drugs users, and then the whole thing
becomes an evil farce. Terrorism my ass... its a system to screw over
the common bloke.

[aneerkoinos]

41. Paranoid

Yes you are.

In policies re weed, EU and European parliament and Ombudsman are the best weapons we have against US, Sweden, France and other nation states trying to create police narcostate with dope-scaremongering.

It was EU that forced Sweden to allow farming of industrial hemp, it's the European organ of drug policy studies that has offered the best info and evidence of harm reduction policies working. It's EU that can act on UN level to effectively oppose US led narcoterrorism, when we get ready to do so.

It's the new EU constitution that gives Europeans a chance to collect a million signatories to force Commission and EP to organize an European wide referendum to legalize weed. Which we would win.

Don't think defencive, think offencive.

[sweetheart]

42. The british media

You know, i've been bombarded in newspapers about the horrors of europe
and indeed, they HAVE used the increased terrorist cooperation to
screw with drugs... but i accept you assuaging comments.

Would that your common sense could advise the british news editors
who seem to be preparing the public for a NON as well. :-)

Indeed, i agree that the EU is a great thing, and i don't veiw a NON
vote as non-EU, just non-the current draft. I feel that some people
are betting on an all or none situation, and its just not like that,
its an ongoing negotiation, referendums or not, on what the form of
the european consensus is to take.

HOw do you like being in the 2nd speed of the european 2 speed not-so
democracy? Do you feel the constitution will make your lot better
back east there in karkki pussi?

[aneerkoinos]

43. Slainte Mhor from karkkipussi!

>>>Indeed, i agree that the EU is a great thing, and i don't veiw a NON vote as non-EU, just non-the current draft. I feel that some people are betting on an all or none situation, and its just not like that, its an ongoing negotiation, referendums or not, on what the form of the european consensus is to take.<<<

Agreed, if I could vote (which I cant here in karkkipussi-land) on the constitution it would be a difficult choise. Currently I'm slightly leaning on the YES, but would have to read the thingie again.

>>>HOw do you like being in the 2nd speed of the european 2 speed not-so democracy? Do you feel the constitution will make your lot better
back east there in karkki pussi?<<<

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. If there's two-speed EU, Finland is in the fast lane, in the Eurozone, and pro common European defence, independent of NATO.

The constitution is not great for small countries, giving more weight to the big ones, and AFAIK does not give EU powers to set social standards such as European minimum wage and minimum tax to fund basic social services, so down we go in the Global race to the bottom, so it seems.

[orpupilofnature57]

37. How about our Constitution?

[T_i_B]

38. Other

I would have to read the document first before making my mind up on it. And I say that as one of the resident Euro-sceptics on DU.