@ISIDEWITHQuestionsDomestic Policy8yrs ago

Should article 49.3 be removed from the Constitution?

Article 49 of the French constitution details the relationships of power between the Prime Minister and Parliament. Clause 3 of this article (49.3) gives the government the power to pass a measure without a vote from parliament. The article allows the government to compel the majority if reluctant to adopt a text, and also to accelerate the legislative process, and in particular to end any obstruction from the opposition. The article has been used fewer than 90 times since its inception in 1958. In 2016 the government used the article to pass a labor reform bill which made it easier for employers to prolong the 35-hour working week, cheaper to lay off staff, and easier to overpower unions.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 441 Bouches-du-Rhône 4 voters.

52%
Yes
48%
No
52%
Yes
48%
No

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 441 Bouches-du-Rhône 4 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 441 Bouches-du-Rhône 4 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Bouches-du-Rhône 4 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @962KL2Y from GU  answered…2yrs2Y

No, but amend it to be used under extreme circumstances

 @9FLSJSFfrom District of Columbia  answered…1yr1Y

Depends on how much the president uses the article.

 @9BMD9KN from Illinois  answered…2yrs2Y

Yes, it's anti-democratic. The only time an executive should have legislative powers is in emergencies.

 @99SYJ2Dfrom New York  answered…2yrs2Y

It shall be done as long as it is not unconstitutional.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

No One’s Safe: Trump’s ‘Border Czar’ Homan Promises Sweeping Deportation Operation

TOM COTTON is slated to be the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, putting “I think mass deportation is just talk, but the era of open borders will be over,” Scott McConnell, a co-founder of The American Conservative, wrote on X. In July a Mexican-born Trump backer told The Times, “Last time, he didn’t even finish the wall. What’s he going to do this time?”Now the answer is taking shape: He’s going to oversee a militarized mass roundup of the undocumented. On Sunday, Trump named Tom Homan, his former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as “border czar.”In a speech to this year’s National Conservatism Conference, Homan, who oversaw Trump’s family separation policy, promised a “historic deportation operation” from which no undocumented immigrant would be safe. “No one’s off the table in the next administration,” he said. “If you’re here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder.”Then, on Monday, Trump named the obsessively anti-immigrant Stephen Miller as his deputy chief of staff. Miller’s portfolio, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan reported in The Times, “is expected to be vast and to far exceed what the eventual title will convey.” Miller has been forthright about his desire to purge immigrants here illegally, as well as many here legally, from the United States.Among other things, Miller has said that Trump would cancel the temporary protected status of thousands of Afghans who fled here after the Taliban’s takeover and take another stab at ending DACA, the program that protects from deportation some immigrants brought to the United States as children.Most significantly, he’s laid out plans to use National Guard troops to help arrest migrants en masse, warehousing them in military camps while they await deportation. No one should be shocked when this happens. I suspect some will be anyway.

▲  2811 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

A New Era for Crypto? Trump’s Transition Team Considers Robinhood Exec for SEC Chair

Trump transition team officials are considering retail brokerage Robinhood's top lawyer, as well as bank regulators and corporate attorneys, for a short list of key financial agency heads they expect to present to the president-elect soon, according to multiple people with knowledge of the matter.Among those being considered for chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission is Dan Gallagher, a Republican SEC commissioner from 2011 to 2015 who is currently chief legal and compliance officer at Robinhood, the people said.Gallagher, who is a popular pick among cryptocurrency executives who donated millions of dollars to Donald Trump's Republican campaign, is the front-runner at this point, although the discussions are fluid, two of the people said.Also in the mix for SEC chair is Paul Atkins, another former Republican SEC commissioner and CEO of consultancy Patomak Global Partners. Atkins served on Trump's transition team in 2016, when he was also a contender for the SEC chair role, Reuters reported at the time.Robert Stebbins, a partner at law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher who served as SEC general counsel during Trump's first administration, is also being discussed for the SEC short list.Trump transition team officials are compiling a short list of a handful of individuals for each financial agency which they will present to Trump, said two of the people. The process could take a few weeks, and it was still too early to say who would ultimately win the top jobs, the people said.Gallagher and Atkins did not respond to requests for comment on Thursday. Stebbins declined to comment.In a statement, Karoline Leavitt, Trump's national press secretary, said: "President-Elect Trump will begin making decisions on who will serve in his second Administration soon. Those decisions will be announced when they are made."Trump's campaign courted crypto industry cash with promises to promote bitcoin and overhaul the SEC, whose Democratic chair, Gary Gensler, has cracked down hard on the industry, saying it has flouted SEC rules. Crypto companies have been pushing for an SEC chair who will quickly end his crackdown and tear up other unfriendly policies,.

▲  78 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

First Lady Feud: Melania Declines Biden Meet-Up Over Privacy Invasion

Melania Trump declined an offer to head to the White House Wednesday and meet with Jill Biden, citing the Biden administration’s raid on Mar-a-Lago as part of the federal government’s investigation into classified documents.“She ain’t going,” a source familiar with Melania’s decision told The Post. “Jill Biden’s husband authorized the FBI snooping through her underwear drawer. The Bidens are disgusting,” the source said.“Jill Biden isn’t someone Melania needs to meet,” the source added.Melania’s husband, President-elect Donald Trump, will sit with President Biden in the Oval Office Wednesday for a traditional post-election meeting.Typically, the first lady hosts her successor for tea in the White House.Melania visited the White House following her husband’s 2016 election win and received a tour from then- first lady Michelle Obama.After Trump lost his re-election bid in 2020, he failed to invite the Bidens to the White House before the Democrat officially assumed office, breaking the decades-old tradition, according to reports at the time.The Post has reached out to the Trump campaign and the White House about Melania’s decision to skip the meeting.The FBI raided Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in August 2022 in its probe of the 45th president’s withholding of classified White House documents.Melania, 54, has previously voiced her displeasure over the raid at their Palm Beach, Florida, mansion.“Yeah, it made me angry,” she said on “Fox & Friends” in a September interview, calling it an “invasion of privacy.” FBI agents scoured Melania’s wardrobe, combed through her 78-year-old husband’s office and even reportedly searched one of her son Barron’s rooms.

▲  229 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

MAGA Purge: Trump Jr. and Carlson Slam Globalists!

Carlson and Donald Trump Jr., the president-elect’s oldest son, outlined what they said were the dangers of bringing neoconservatives into the administration—men and women, they claimed, who seek to control him, not serve him. They also argued that Pompeo had proven himself to be disloyal, the people said, pointing to Pompeo’s decision to distance himself from false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, and comments he made that the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol by Trump supporters was “unacceptable.”Within days of the election, Pompeo was out of the running. The president-elect posted on Truth Social that Pompeo and Nikki Haley, Trump’s former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, wouldn’t be landing jobs in his administration.Officials such as Haley, who challenged Trump during the Republican primary, and former national security adviser Robert O’Brien were passed over for jobs as Trump and his team looked to stock his cabinet with “fresh blood,” as one transition official put it, who have roots in the MAGA movement. The perception among some within Trump’s inner circle is that appointees such as Pompeo would follow a more conventional GOP approach to national security policy by supporting U.S. involvement in overseas conflicts, such as Ukraine, or icing out traditional adversaries, such as Russia. Pete Hegseth, a military veteran and former Fox News host whom Trump chose to lead the Pentagon, has criticized U.S. involvement in the conflict in Ukraine, and has touted a controversial view that women should be barred from combat. But Hegseth’s path to confirmation has been fraught with challenges because of a number of personal controversies.

▲  107 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  199 replies2 agree