incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: veto stuff
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2002 13:25:36 GMT
At 12:41 AM -0500 11/7/02, Ted Husted wrote:
>I agree with Steve in that the assertions that a "veto cannot be
>overruled" and a "veto must be justified" are contradictory. The
>implication is that a unjustified veto is void, but who decides it
>is void? And in deciding a veto is void, is it not being

The concept is that a veto must be rationlized. There must be
a reason behind it and one that can be possibly put to a test
(think scientific theory here). So a veto because "I don't like
it" is not valid, and since it's not valid isn't being "overruled"
because it just doesn't exist.
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [|]
      "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
             will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson

View raw message