We are discussing amendments to the Constitution: Are we a federation or what ...


Society today is actively discussing amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. To say that this came as a surprise to me, I can’t. Just because this activity is artificially stimulated by our media, our parties, government agencies and public organizations.


I recently participated in one such discussion. The bulk of the participants, as elsewhere, are probably politically active young people, mostly university students who are really trying to contribute to the creation of the new Basic Law of the Russian Federation.

And, as often happens among young people, most of the speakers did not broadcast their personal opinion, but the opinion of the organization or association to which they belong. And since I, by virtue of the presence of a gray beard, personified conservatives and retrograde cities for them, a lot of questions were addressed personally to me. They convinced me of the need to change the constitution.

Is Russia a Federation?


One of the most important issues was the question of the federal structure of our state. From where the wind blows, I understand. The guys from Navalny’s headquarters are quite active with young people. But even among fairly adult people, I have repeatedly heard talk about unhappy Russians who do not have their own state, their own territory. It seems like the small nations have their own republic, but the state-forming Russian people do not.

Indeed, the question of the structure of our state is rather complicated. It is complicated, first of all, because for most ordinary people the very concept of federation is rather vague. Many simply do not understand what it is. What is the difference between a federation and a confederation.

Agree, in the modern world of federations is enough. Studying the structure of these states just leads to a mess in the heads of students. Mexico, Brazil, Switzerland, India, Germany, Russia, the USA and many others. The name is one, but the essence of the state is different.

I understand that now someone will blame me for illiteracy. USA and Switzerland are confederations! Alas, the name does not matter. America was a confederation at the time of the creation of this country. Today it is a form of federation. And the states that were once part of the united state as independent countries are now only part of a single whole.

Is Russia a Federation? The answer is both simple and complex at the same time. Yes, we are a federation. Although, if you think about it, the federation is non-standard. As our venerable scientists say, an asymmetric federation. For a simplified understanding: the regions of the federation have slightly different rights.

The national republics in our constitution are actually called state entities, they have their own constitutions. Regions and territories do not have this right. There are only charters. Hence the talk of "we are in our land," "we will protect our land."

Features of the Federation in Russia


Let me remind you the basics of government. The subjects of the federation do not have state sovereignty! They possess only some signs of the state. I repeat, with some signs. The rest is recorded in the still existing Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Remember the principles of our association? State integrity, equality and self-determination of peoples, unity of the state power system, supremacy of federal laws, limitation of subjects of jurisdiction and authority, equality of subjects of the federation. Simply? Really simple.

It was these principles that served as the basis for a clear separation of powers between federal and local authorities. Again - from the current Constitution.

The RF is in charge of: foreign policy and defense, financial, currency, customs regulation, legal proceedings, criminal and civil law, and the publication of federal laws.

In joint jurisdiction are: protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens, issues of upbringing, education, science and culture, administrative, labor, family, housing law, coordination of foreign economic and international relations of entities, environmental protection, laws of subjects of the federation (mandatory compliance with federal laws).

A natural question arises: what can subjects do on their own? Alas, the creators of the current Constitution tactfully left the answer to this question. All other issues outside the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation ...

Is it possible to resolve any issue without the intervention of the federal center


This question caused the most heated discussions among the participants. Most active young people have already encountered the traditional Russian “guys, there is no money in the local budget.” And there is always no money for everything.

For a young man who wants to do something really good, important for his own city, village, country, it sounds like a direct refusal of his help, from the young man or girl. It’s like “get out of here, without you doing things to the throat, we’ll do it ourselves”.

And after all they leave. And not only young ones.

Have you noticed how the attitude of people towards cleanups on cleaning or planting trees has changed? Veterans remember how residents of high-rise buildings went out in the spring to clean the lawns near the house, to repair children's swings or sandboxes in the yard. They went out themselves. Just because they saw that the neighbor had come out that the ZhEK had brought shovels and rakes and tree seedlings in the back of a standing truck.

Today, after a large number of years, I walk in the park in which I once planted several trees. I do not know if it’s “mine” whether it is birch or spruce. Maybe my school friend or girlfriend.

We then planted trees with a laugh, for our own pleasure. And is it important? It is important that here it is, a park that is perceived by young people for granted. "He was always here." I remember that “always” there was a deserted shore of the Irtysh!

What needs to be changed in the Constitution of Russia


Discussing any issue is important. Even with those who do not really have reliable information on this issue. It is important first of all for yourself. Thoughts are built into clear definitions.

A unitary state with a strong central authority that exists today under the guise of a federation - what is this? Why do we need a mask? It is time to officially consolidate the community of peoples of Russia in the form of a unitary state. Then many hidden "mines" that are inherent in the current Basic Law disappear.

Otherwise, if the majority decides that it is necessary to preserve a federal state, several declared, but not valid, norms should be legalized. First of all, equalize the regions of Russia. Remove the ethnic component from the constitutions of the republics.

Moreover, it may be worth removing the administrative division of the country that is incomprehensible to many. Well, it is incomprehensible to a simple person of what subjects Russia consists of. Okay, 85 regions - this is understandable. What next? Republics, territories, regions, autonomous region, autonomous okrugs, cities of federal significance ... Assorted names. Perhaps it is worth leaving one name - the region.

Further. In case of preservation of the federation, it is necessary to introduce a norm according to which each subject of the federation has the right to have its own legislation, taking into account the national characteristics of the region. Nothing terrible will happen if some law in certain regions is tougher or, conversely, softer than the federal one, in accordance with local traditions and customs.

After all, there is, for example, in some Caucasian republics the practice of electing leaders not by direct voting, but through the voting of local parliaments. So what? Did this somehow infringe on the rights of citizens of these republics? Wise and worthy people were always respected there and reckoned with their opinions. And the local parliament is a collection of the most respected people in the republic.

I think this is not the last article on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. The discussion does not end there. And we will give readers the opportunity to express their own opinions on certain issues.
Author:
Photos used:
Russian President's website
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

259 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 14 February 2020 09: 51 New
    • 23
    • 8
    +15
    Are we a federation or what ...
    More likely "or where ..."? I’m never once for Navalny, I can’t stand it at all, this "empty-eyed" person tearing to power, but I’m for the state and its governing bodies not only remember the Russians and the Slavs in our country, not only holidays, but this is not true.
    1. Svarog 14 February 2020 09: 55 New
      • 27
      • 12
      +15
      Quote: svp67
      Are we a federation or what ...
      More likely "or where ..."? I’m never once for Navalny, I can’t stand it at all, this "empty-eyed" person tearing to power, but I’m for the state and its governing bodies to remember Russians and Slavs in our country only on holidays , but this is not true.

      I agree .. As for the Federation, I think this is not right.
      A natural question arises: what can subjects do on their own? Alas, the creators of the current Constitution tactfully left the answer to this question. All other issues outside the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation ...

      The constitution must be respected .. The federal structure is clearly not suitable for us, not in spirit, not in security, not in economy ..
      1. svp67 14 February 2020 09: 57 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Quote: Svarog
        The constitution must be respected .. The federal structure is clearly not suitable for us, not in spirit, not in security, not in economy ..

        And then what? Confederation, Empire, Union)))?
        1. Svarog 14 February 2020 10: 01 New
          • 35
          • 15
          +20
          Quote: svp67
          Empire, Union)))?

          Empire -Yes! The union as it is inside the country is not very ... I want to see Russia monolithic. You can simply and modestly - the Soviet Empire)))
          1. svp67 14 February 2020 10: 06 New
            • 16
            • 4
            +12
            Quote: Svarog
            Empire -Yes! The union as it is inside the country is not very ... I want to see Russia monolithic. You can just- the Soviet Empire)))

            Unfortunately, it’s unlikely to succeed ... Yeltsin’s “take sovereignty as much as you can” now climbs out.
            But what I would like to change in the Constitution is to introduce the concept of national ideology - PATRIOTISM and return the wording that all subsoil is the property of the entire population of Russia
            1. Svarog 14 February 2020 10: 12 New
              • 16
              • 7
              +9
              Quote: svp67
              PATRIOTISM and return the wording that all subsoil is the property of the entire population of Russia

              This is a particularly important point! Like the fact that the Constitution would be respected. And it is fair!
              1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 23 New
                • 16
                • 2
                +14
                Quote: Svarog
                Like the fact that the Constitution would be respected. And it is fair!

                Constitution must be respected
                Without compliance with the Constitution, we can easily fall into chaos. Chaos can cause and will cause the collapse of the state. Those who minus you for your comment on compliance with the constitution, apparently, and want the collapse of our state.
                1. New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 37 New
                  • 17
                  • 4
                  +13
                  Quote: Red
                  Constitution must be respected

                  add- ALL!
                  1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 52 New
                    • 15
                    • 1
                    +14
                    Quote: Silvestr
                    add- ALL!

                    Be sure to everyone! Otherwise, what's the point of the Constitution.
                2. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 12: 44 New
                  • 10
                  • 6
                  +4
                  Quote: Red
                  Those who minus you for your comment

                  Yes there are full-time minors here
                  Someone did not like, they will minus everything in a row on all branches
              2. gurzuf 14 February 2020 10: 41 New
                • 16
                • 2
                +14
                "all subsoil is the OWNERSHIP of the entire population of RUSSIA." I wonder if anyone introduced this amendment into the discussion, or is it “not advisable”?
                1. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 11 New
                  • 5
                  • 0
                  +5
                  Quote: gurzuf
                  Has anyone made this amendment to the discussion or is it "not advisable"?

                  This is one of the first amendments that were made literally at the beginning of the discussion.
            2. Revival 14 February 2020 13: 39 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              It’s just for such an amendment that “all hands will be beaten off”, this is the Kashcheyev needle and the pillar of modernity.
              Already such sedition will not be allowed and then pronounce aloud
          2. neri73-r 14 February 2020 10: 55 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            Quote: Svarog
            You can simply and modestly - the Soviet Empire)))

            Unfortunately, the “Soviet Empire” rested in Bose along with its founder in March 1953, the heirs of the Red Emperor were great boots, they drowned in them, turned out to be small and greedy.
          3. Efgen 14 February 2020 11: 41 New
            • 10
            • 2
            +8
            What in the modern Russian empire is Soviet? Public ownership of the means of production? You can call something, meaning - zero.
          4. Tatyana Pershina 14 February 2020 13: 13 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            "You can simply and modestly - the Soviet Empire)))"
            As some king said (I don’t remember who, laziness is to delve into the internet): "Call me easily:" Your Majesty "
            1. Victor N 14 February 2020 17: 16 New
              • 0
              • 3
              -3
              Why not the Russian Empire?
        2. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 19 New
          • 18
          • 5
          +13
          Quote: svp67
          Confederation, Empire, Union)))?

          Only the Soviet Republic! Only Soviet power!
          1. Ryazan87 14 February 2020 10: 36 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            What do you mean by this concept? precisely in terms of government.
            1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 47 New
              • 16
              • 5
              +11
              I put the following into these concepts: firstly, the Soviet republic is a unitary state, I am aware that the classics had in mind the federation under the name of the Soviet Republic, but time has changed and now the federal state carries the danger of a state collapse on the national question.
              Secondly, under the term Soviet power is the power of the people through representatives of the people, people's deputies. The supremacy of the Supreme Council in the state, as it was in the USSR.
              Thirdly, a return to socialism.
              PS From a speech by Comrade Tilvin Silva, Secretary General of the JVP Party, at a seminar held in Colombo on 27.01.2020/XNUMX/XNUMX
              “All truly progressive activists commemorate Lenin. But it would be much more useful to read his works, and moreover, try to read our society through the works of Lenin. By doing so, we can find the right solutions to the problems facing our society.”
              1. Ryazan87 14 February 2020 11: 14 New
                • 3
                • 2
                +1
                1. About a unitary state ok, although, of course, it is rather strange for the Soviet republic.
                2. As part of your concept, what about the presence / absence of a multiparty system? And the role of party bodies in government. This is, in fact, a key issue.
                3. "Return to socialism" - what do we take as a model? Those. something like the USSR of the 70s? Or closer to Stalinism?
                1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 11: 48 New
                  • 14
                  • 4
                  +10
                  1. Nothing incidentally strange in the Soviet unitary state. Why was the RSFSR created? Just because Russia was on the verge of collapse. And the Bolsheviks and Lenin, thanks to federalization, saved the state from collapse. Today the situation has changed. Today’s state structure can lead to the collapse of the country. Moreover, as I wrote above, we do not have a federal state; localities cannot always resolve any issues without a center.
                  2. The multi-party system will not go anywhere. The main thing is that there would be no pro-Western parties in the Supreme Council. For example, in the USA he has other parties, but no one wants to leave the capitalist path of development of their state.
                  3. And during the time of Brezhnev, there was a lot of good in the economy. But closer to me is the Stalinist economic approach. He is the only, in my opinion, the right way to develop the economy and industry.
                  4. I really respect the classics of communism Lenin and Stalin. I understand that my views are a little contrary to theory, but time goes ahead and does not stand still, everything develops. Much of the Lenin-Stalin theory is still relevant. And it can be put into practice in today's Russia. But for some reason they do not want to read and follow the advice of such great people.
                  1. Sergey39 14 February 2020 12: 34 New
                    • 4
                    • 1
                    +3
                    Quote: Red
                    But closer to me is the Stalinist economic approach.

                    Me too, but can Putin take on the role of Stalin? He is still a liberal. Or pretending to be?
                    1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 12: 50 New
                      • 13
                      • 4
                      +9
                      Personally, I believe that such great personalities as Stalin are born once every two hundred years. Therefore, many can try to take an example from Stalin, try to be like him, but not everyone can become the new Stalin!
                      1. Sergey39 14 February 2020 13: 10 New
                        • 6
                        • 1
                        +5
                        So without Stalin, the Stalinist order cannot be returned. There is nothing to talk about. And democracy without a leader is an empty talking room.
                      2. Gene84 14 February 2020 16: 29 New
                        • 10
                        • 2
                        +8
                        Quote: Sergey39
                        So without Stalin, the Stalinist order cannot be returned. There is nothing to talk about.

                        precisely noticed. It’s difficult to restore order without the new Stalin.
                2. Ryazan87 14 February 2020 15: 11 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  1.
                  Just because Russia was on the verge of collapse. And the Bolsheviks and Lenin, thanks to federalization, saved the state from collapse.
                  - It is very controversial that federalization can save the state from disintegration, unless delayed under certain circumstances. And the further construction of the USSR with the right of secession of the Union republics, in principle, laid the legal basis for the collapse. Simply, within the framework of the existing political regime, all these constructions were of secondary importance in the conditions of the presence of the main party vertical of power. While the party held power, maintained unity and controlled the law enforcement agencies - everything held on.
                  2.
                  A multi-party system will not go anywhere. The main thing is that there would be no pro-Western parties in the Supreme Council.
                  - Sorry, but this is mutually exclusive. Who will set the criteria for classifying as "pro-Western" parties? Who will implement the filter of objectionable parties? Under the conditions of a clearly established state ideology (socialism), everything will very quickly come to a one-party dictatorship - see the example of the Mensheviks and Left Social Revolutionaries.
                  3.
                  But closer to me is the Stalinist economic approach.
                  - Again, it would be interesting to understand what you mean by this concept. And how are you going to take it now (well, at least the experience of forced industrialization). What exactly? I'm no kidding, I'm really interested.
                  By the way, the current economic model of the Russian Federation in a number of respects largely resembles the NEP period (well, state-owned corporations have replaced steel trusts).
                3. Nyrobsky 14 February 2020 16: 41 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Red
                  Today the situation has changed. Today’s state structure can lead to the collapse of the country. Moreover, as I wrote above, we do not have a federal state; localities cannot always resolve any issues without a center.

                  As a preventive measure against collapse according to a national sign, it is necessary, in the state system, to abolish the concepts of "Republic" and "Autonomy", returning to the concept of the region (province) - Kazan, Petrozavodsk, Ufa, Syktyvkar, etc. Abolish the presidential institutions where they are, with the exception of the president of Russia, all the rest are heads or governors. The Constitution is one for all, with some amendments to local customs and mentality, which will not contradict the basic principles laid down in the Constitution.
                  Quote: Red
                  The main thing is that there would be no pro-Western parties in the Supreme Council.
                  Here, as it were, it is already proposed to exclude the possibility of occupying public posts in the presence of dual citizenship. If this is applied to parties blowing in the pro-Western direction or receiving financial support from there, then a sufficient measure would be the refusal to register them through the Ministry of Justice of Russia.
                  Quote: Red
                  I really respect the classics of communism Lenin and Stalin. I understand that my views are a little contrary to theory, but time goes ahead and does not stand still, everything develops. Much of the Lenin-Stalin theory is still relevant. And it can be put into practice in today's Russia. But for some reason they do not want to read and follow the advice of such great people.
                  Because we have capitalism, and therefore it (capitalism), having seized the means of production, does not foresee the surrender of its positions and a return to social equality. Alas. It is senseless to call on them (the capitalists) to repent and voluntarily share, because if this happens, then only when the factors come together in Lenin's wording explaining the onset of the revolutionary situation - This is when “The tops cannot, the lower classes do not want to”.
            2. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 13 New
              • 7
              • 1
              +6
              Quote: Red
              Soviet power is the power of the people through representatives of the people, people's deputies. The supremacy of the Supreme Council in the state, as it was in the USSR.

              All that you write about is discussed under the same term-democracy. It is this term that is proposed to replace the word democracy ... Let's see what will happen in the final sentence
            3. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 12: 46 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: Red
              it is the power of the people through representatives of the people, people's deputies.

              Yeah...
              You in a thought they show themselves in all "glory"
          2. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 48 New
            • 10
            • 3
            +7
            What do you suggest? Could you explain your position.
            1. Lipchanin 14 February 2020 14: 09 New
              • 6
              • 3
              +3
              Quote: Red
              What do you suggest? Could you explain your position.

              Well, if only this

              I have already heard such a story
              It was in Germany
              In some town there was a chemical plant.
              A river flowed through the town. This factory poisoned everything there. All animals disappeared in the river.
              Then the deputies of this town decided that the director of this plant should live roofing felts on the territory of the plant, or next to it
              Two years later, livestock returned to the river and nature blossomed.
              And I propose depriving deputies of immunity and depriving them of the lion's share of benefits.
              Then, they will run for deputies not for the sake of “feeding troughs”
              1. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 14: 44 New
                • 7
                • 5
                +2
                Kim Jong-un forgot to say the following - every Korean child must end up at the expense of the state an elite Swiss boarding school - as I did. Every Korean young man can sponsor a pop group at public expense by dressing the musicians in clothes from Dolce Gabbana, as I do. laughing
              2. Gene84 14 February 2020 16: 35 New
                • 9
                • 0
                +9
                Quote: Lipchanin
                And I propose depriving deputies of immunity and depriving them of the lion's share of benefits.

                the offer is good. the question is, who will pass the law on depriving deputies of immunity and deputy privileges? deputies themselves? they won’t do it. if only such a clause will be spelled out in the constitution, which is unlikely.
            2. Krasnoyarsk 14 February 2020 14: 48 New
              • 7
              • 3
              +4
              Quote: Red
              What do you suggest? Could you explain your position.

              If you introduce one single article into the constitution - “On the criminal liability of the authorities to the people”, then all the other amendments are dances with a tambourine.
              At the next presidential and Duma elections, the voter in the ballot puts the previous assessment; to the President and the Duma on a 3-point scale: good, satisfactory, bad.
              If it’s good, then both the president and all deputies of the Duma are awarded, if satisfactory, which in principle is unlikely, then without consequences. And if it’s bad, then the UK initiates a criminal case for each person. For example, if the investigation established that the deputy voted against the law, the adoption of which led to a deterioration in the life of the people, then he is released from punishment. And if he voted “in favor,” then we ask you, how many were in the Duma, as many in “places not so distant” without the right to correspond. So that neither parcels with gingerbread, nor transfers come.
              Thanks to this law, the president will not long endure a worthless, like Medvedev, government. Not a single deputy will vote on the law worsening the lives of citizens.
              How to evaluate the work of the authorities? Yes, simple. The life of my family, the life of the people around me has improved, so the authorities have worked on this. Life has worsened, which means that the authorities worked only to improve it for a particular category of citizens.
              I talked about the principles. And the specifics will be developed by lawyers.
              1. Hypatius 14 February 2020 15: 15 New
                • 4
                • 3
                +1
                Initiative group for the preparation of the referendum "For Responsible Power".

                From the site "https://zaotvet.info/
                1. Krasnoyarsk 14 February 2020 15: 27 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: Hypatius
                  Initiative group for the preparation of the referendum "For Responsible Power".

                  From the site "https://zaotvet.info/

                  Not surprised. Although, frankly, I did not know. I know Mukhin from his books. They are informative, the logic of the author’s reasoning is wonderful, but the writing style leaves much to be desired.
    2. ultra 14 February 2020 10: 16 New
      • 11
      • 7
      +4
      Quote: Svarog
      . The federal structure is clearly not suitable for us, not in spirit, not in security, not in economy ..

      We don’t have a federation, only one name. In a federation, the center does not drain from the regions, which would then be returned.
      1. Svarog 14 February 2020 10: 19 New
        • 21
        • 6
        +15
        Quote: ultra
        Quote: Svarog
        . The federal structure is clearly not suitable for us, not in spirit, not in security, not in economy ..

        We don’t have a federation, only one name. In a federation, the center does not drain from the regions, which would then be returned.

        That’s what we’re talking about. We often have one reality on paper, another ..
        1. cloud catcher 14 February 2020 11: 23 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Federation with echoes of feudalism.
          1. cloud catcher 14 February 2020 18: 40 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            It's nice that officials read VO (who else would put a minus, it’s not a simple one that drove ...)
            In Russia, in 2015, a toll on federal highways of trucks weighing over 12 tons appeared; recently, toll roads appeared, including on the site of previously free highways. Moscow and St. Petersburg are preparing a paid entry into the city for non-environmental cars. The introduction of toll collection for commercial vehicles weighing less than 12 tons is being discussed.
            And the capital itself acts like a vacuum cleaner, in relation to the whole country. And Sobyanin’s answer is that “Russia won’t feel if Moscow gives back ... income (something like that), it’s better to stay as it is. At the same time, the standard of living differs significantly from the province beyond the Moscow Ring Road. Here they are signs ...
            Something is wrong.
      2. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 14 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        In the vast majority of states that are federal or unitary, most taxes go directly to the federal budget, and then are distributed. This is normal, part should depend on the whole.
    3. Observer2014 14 February 2020 10: 47 New
      • 4
      • 12
      -8
      The program that hooked me! Who did not look, look carefully. In it, right there is who is who.
      1. New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 53 New
        • 19
        • 12
        +7
        Quote: Observer2014
        The program that hooked me!

        how you look and listen to Solovyov! I'm sick of him
        1. Observer2014 14 February 2020 11: 10 New
          • 8
          • 7
          +1
          Quote: Silvestr
          Quote: Observer2014
          The program that hooked me!

          how you look and listen to Solovyov! I'm sick of him

          But I don’t listen to it. You listen to the program itself. Listen carefully to who and what the studio is saying. And get into the essence. But pay attention not to the wrapper in the form of this Solovyov’s.
  2. smel 14 February 2020 09: 59 New
    • 13
    • 4
    +9
    its controls are remembered only on holidays, but this is not true.
    I agree that the Constitution is remembered only on holidays. But about power they recall much more often and not always with a kind word. Apparently the authorities deserve it.
  3. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 17 New
    • 17
    • 3
    +14
    Quote: svp67
    Are we a federation or what ...
    More likely "or where ..."?

    In my opinion, we are not a federation. On the ground, judging by the news from the regions, sometimes it is simply not possible to resolve the issue without intervention from the center.
    The constitution must necessarily spell out the ideology that we are building, where we are moving. In the USSR, this was all clear. For thirty years we have not understood where we are going and what we are building, what kind of society.
    The national question is very complex, it is not possible to discuss it within the site.
    The Constitution must be spelled out, as you correctly pointed out, "all subsoil is the OWNERSHIP of the entire population of Russia." First you need to analyze all those enterprises that own subsoil and conduct their development. In addition, the banking, financial, sector of our economy is subject to nationalization.
    1. ultra 14 February 2020 10: 25 New
      • 18
      • 3
      +15
      Quote: Red
      On the ground, judging by the news from the regions, sometimes it is simply not possible to resolve the issue without intervention from the center.

      Because our "guarantor" created an estate state in Russia. We have returned practically to feudalism. In my opinion, if we do not send EDR to the dustbin of history, we have no chance of becoming an advanced state.
    2. Hypatius 14 February 2020 15: 28 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      The national question is very complex, it is not possible to discuss it within the site.
      . Let's try it carefully. Here I see, not so much "nationalism" as the lack of the international right of the nation to self-determination. That is, the right of the people to changes in the system, land and mineral resources. I’m afraid that the “population” of Ephemenism may not work here. In the meantime, the share of Russians, according to world rules, allows us to consider the country mono-ethnic. Even if you call this option nationalism, then, unlike Nazism, it does not imply an infringement of others.
  • Lamata 14 February 2020 09: 53 New
    • 17
    • 14
    +3
    Yes, the flow of amendments poured !!! Yesterday I watched that they proposed to introduce honey workers from the community, in short .... there are no words, but what the government expects, I will definitely vote against.
    1. Svarog 14 February 2020 10: 02 New
      • 15
      • 9
      +6
      Quote: Lamata
      Yes, the flow of amendments poured !!! Yesterday I watched that they proposed to introduce honey workers from the community, in short .... there are no words, but what the government expects, I will definitely vote against.

      I’m trying to understand what exactly they want to change and actually for what purpose .. Yesterday I listened to Platoshkin .. but I will still analyze .. have not decided yet ..
      1. Whalebone 14 February 2020 10: 11 New
        • 11
        • 14
        -3
        They want to "bring it in line." And then the Constitution is, but does not work, unscrupulous. Starting from the people who are the source of power, ending with Putin, who since 2008 should not have been at the helm. According to the Constitution.
        1. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 19 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: Whalebone
          ending with Putin, who since 2008 should not have been at the helm. According to the Constitution.

          Well, why repeat stupidity? It is under the constitution that he is in power ... And if he had not started to change it now, in 28 he could have run again .. There is one word there - “in a row”. This is the secret of power on a rotational basis: 8 years president, 4 rest ...
          1. Revival 14 February 2020 14: 06 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            That is, 6 edited, but forgot to remove in a row? Failed?
            Or just didn’t want to?
            Of course, if where you need to include ... and where you suddenly need common sense, you can read a lot, interpret in the constitution.
            As the norm on freedom of rallies and meetings, so common sense suddenly dictates a permissive order, nothing that completely contradicts Freedom of assembly and the Notification Order that allows for preparatory activities.
            And how in a row we read so that only in a row, but we reject the common sense and declare it with a smart face, but it’s not possible in a row.
            And nothing that makes sense that no more than 2 terms.
      2. Lamata 14 February 2020 10: 52 New
        • 9
        • 10
        -1
        Platoshkin reasonably covers. although rude and no no distorted. But in any case, I am supporting him. and I will vote for his ideas.
        1. Rusland 14 February 2020 12: 18 New
          • 7
          • 2
          +5
          Quote: Lamata
          Platoshkin reasonably covers. although rude and no no distorted. But in any case, I am supporting him. and I will vote for his ideas.

          What do you have with the syllable my friend belay
          1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 30 New
            • 5
            • 6
            -1
            right arm broken
            1. Rusland 14 February 2020 12: 37 New
              • 7
              • 3
              +4
              Quote: Lamata
              right arm broken

              Ay yay-yy, on the left is felt underline. wink Proved by forensics. yes
              1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 40 New
                • 6
                • 6
                0
                There is one)) laughing You can’t imagine how inconvenient it is to shave with your left hand
                1. Rusland 14 February 2020 12: 45 New
                  • 6
                  • 4
                  +2
                  Quote: Lamata
                  There is one)) laughing You can’t imagine how inconvenient it is to shave with your left hand

                  I agree, usually I say in such cases, they say sit on a stump, eat a pie. yes A healthy hand of course. wink
            2. Lamata 14 February 2020 13: 26 New
              • 6
              • 7
              -1
              Someone liked my broken arm, I can see, clearly, the arm of the Kremlin.
              1. Rusland 14 February 2020 17: 00 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Quote: Lamata
                Someone liked my broken arm, I can see, clearly, the arm of the Kremlin.

                I agree with you if you are not the navel of the land, there is one more I have such a pacifier here, I can introduce you. yes
                1. Lamata 14 February 2020 17: 02 New
                  • 3
                  • 5
                  -2
                  No, not the navel of the earth, but even moderate self-conceit.
                  1. Rusland 14 February 2020 17: 07 New
                    • 4
                    • 3
                    +1
                    But I can introduce him, you won’t lose anything, but the path is trodden by him, a curve with it. yes
      3. populist 14 February 2020 12: 19 New
        • 11
        • 5
        +6
        Svarog (Vladimir)
        I’m trying to understand what exactly they want to change and actually for what purpose .. Yesterday I listened to Platoshkin .. but I will still analyze .. have not decided yet ..

        What is there to analyze?
        There is an operation (fraud) of Elbasy the Great. bully
        This is the goal. negative
        Everything else is a screen and carrot in front of the nose. wassat
        The authorities have been writing about the transfer for several years. hi
        1. Svarog 14 February 2020 13: 09 New
          • 17
          • 4
          +13
          Quote: populist
          Svarog (Vladimir)
          I’m trying to understand what exactly they want to change and actually for what purpose .. Yesterday I listened to Platoshkin .. but I will still analyze .. have not decided yet ..

          What is there to analyze?
          There is an operation (fraud) of Elbasy the Great. bully
          This is the goal. negative
          Everything else is a screen and carrot in front of the nose. wassat
          The authorities have been writing about the transfer for several years. hi

          I am inclined to this very thought hi
          1. populist 14 February 2020 14: 43 New
            • 6
            • 3
            +3
            Svarog (Vladimir)
            I am inclined to this very thought hi

            Hired Political Scientists Spill Nightingale Now
            and other songbirds fellow fellow fellow
            trying to divert the people’s eyes from the raised throne. am
            The answer to all rational people can only be a boycott. stop
            the so-called survey. negative
            1. Svarog 14 February 2020 14: 50 New
              • 9
              • 4
              +5
              Quote: populist
              The answer to all rational people can only be a boycott.
              the so-called survey.

              The boycott will give grandiose fraud .. I think it's better to go and vote, against!
              1. Romey 14 February 2020 15: 17 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                Here the situation is so contradictory that everywhere you throw a wedge. If you get a boycott, they will vote for you. If you come and vote in a wrong way to Putin, then they will calculate how he needs to. 146% took it in the 18th year. Well, to the extremes, if something goes wrong with them, then Ellochka will say that the ballots are mediocrely thrown in, the results will be canceled and a new ballot will be thrown into the ballot when they hit the heavy Solovyov-Kiselyov artillery.
              2. populist 14 February 2020 15: 41 New
                • 2
                • 3
                -1
                Svarog (Vladimir)
                The boycott will give grandiose fraud .. I think it's better to go and vote, against!

                It’s not so easy to juggle empty areas. Especially if there are observers. And indeed, how can you participate in this mockery of people, common sense and the basic law.
                1. Romey 14 February 2020 17: 23 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  Alas, that doesn’t work out anyway. As usual, Putinists mobilize, and they learned this, their guards: security officials, retirees, teachers, doctors with the help of a zomboyaschik and life-giving administrative pendels. So they will create the appearance of "supporting the leader in a single impulse."
                  1. populist 14 February 2020 18: 21 New
                    • 2
                    • 1
                    +1
                    Romei (Dmitry)
                    Alas, that doesn’t work out anyway. As usual, Putinists mobilize, and they learned this, their guards: security officials, retirees, teachers, doctors with the help of a zomboyaschik and life-giving administrative pendels. So they will create the appearance of "supporting the leader in a single impulse."

                    I understand it.
                    In these circumstances, most likely it will be so. Therefore, they are in a hurry so that the people do not figure out which they ebasy palm off. Unfortunately, there is no organized force (or forces) capable of explaining the machinations to the people ... and providing reliable observation.
      4. Revival 14 February 2020 13: 44 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        Yes, all these dances about the state council, so as not to get puffed even with the elections, but to yourself according to the law, to you 146%, and now to you, and this again to you
    2. Gost2012 14 February 2020 10: 04 New
      • 10
      • 15
      -5
      Quote: Lamata
      in short .... there are no words, but what the government expects, I will definitely vote against.

      in other words, are you for having people with dual citizenship without residency qualifications in government bodies, and international law should take precedence in Russia over its own?
      Good Russian, nothing to say ...
      1. Romey 14 February 2020 10: 12 New
        • 20
        • 11
        +9
        I am also unambiguously against all Putin's amendments. Just not yet decided whether I will participate in this scam at all. And, with regard to the magnificence of these amendments, historical experience suggests that Putin's cheaters and swindlers will find a way around them and there is no doubt about that.
        1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 30 New
          • 15
          • 5
          +10
          Quote: romey
          Just not yet decided whether I will participate in this scam at all

          Must participate. Regardless of what the scam is or not. It is necessary to participate in order for the authorities to know our opinion. Although they do not listen to our opinion, they will know that we are against or in favor and will therefore know our opinion about the authorities.
          1. Romey 14 February 2020 10: 43 New
            • 12
            • 7
            +5
            A colleague, the bitter experience of the election of 18, clearly showed that it’s harmful to sit down to play with the katals. The authorities parallel to any opinion if it runs counter to the opinion of Putin. I doubt Putin knew about the majority against pension reform. Did it help us somehow? No, from the word at all. Unfortunately, political systems like the Russian Federation do not change through voting and elections. The only question is how long the agony will last. In the Qing Empire, this process lasted about a hundred years ... Well, I hope you understand what I mean?
            1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 10: 55 New
              • 12
              • 4
              +8
              I understand what you mean.
              And I respect your opinion and decision, although I believe that it is necessary to participate in the elections and in the referendum. hi
              1. Romey 14 February 2020 11: 02 New
                • 10
                • 9
                +1
                I have not yet made a final decision. I’ll listen to what such respected people as Kvachkov, Strelkov, Ivashov and others will say about this and then having weighed everything in my head, it will be possible to make a sober decision ...
                1. Revival 14 February 2020 12: 04 New
                  • 3
                  • 3
                  0
                  Unfortunately, Kvachkov succumbed to the chimera of the alleged priority of international law, which has no problem
            2. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 13 New
              • 9
              • 4
              +5
              Yes, there is no power to be silent. And silently, sitting in the kitchen, we won’t get anything.
        2. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 22 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Quote: romey
          Just not yet decided whether I will participate in this scam at all.

          Well, yes .... To later proudly declare that he did not participate in the adoption of this constitution. And how does this position differ from "my hut from the edge"? Even a frog in a jug of milk didn’t allow herself to give up ... But a man thinks ...
          1. Romey 14 February 2020 12: 43 New
            • 7
            • 3
            +4
            Alexander, I think, it’s enough for me to quote one politician, even a damn ambiguous one, but nonetheless a great one: “It doesn’t matter who and how to vote, it is important who and how he believes” ... Moreover, the laws of historical and socio-political development confirm these the words. Yes, and personal experience, too. The 18th year opened my eyes to a lot of things and considerably diminished optimistic illusions.
            1. Tatyana Pershina 14 February 2020 14: 46 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              ] "It does not matter who and how to vote, it is important who and how it considers."
              The phrase belongs to Napoleon 3 and the translation has undergone a change that distorted the meaning.
              Correct: It does not matter who and how to vote, it is important who and how the CAM (omitted during translation) counts (does not count, but means).
              1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 20 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              This was said by the writer Anatoly Rybakov.
          2. New Year day 14 February 2020 13: 36 New
            • 11
            • 4
            +7
            Quote: domokl
            To later proudly declare that he did not participate in the adoption of this constitution.

            and what will change?

            will be so now. The main thing is to count correctly.
            According to the law, the only form of voting on state issues is a referendum. Where is the referendum?
        3. populist 14 February 2020 13: 44 New
          • 4
          • 6
          -2
          Romei (Dmitry)
          I am also unambiguously against all Putin's amendments. Just not yet decided whether I will participate in this scam at all.

          No need to participate in this scam (circus tent). Only boycott. negative
          Elections are another matter. You must participate in the elections.
      2. New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 31 New
        • 21
        • 11
        +10
        Quote: Gost2012
        Are you for the fact that people with dual citizenship would get into the authorities, without the qualification of sedentary, and international law should take precedence in Russia over their own?

        let me curiosity, but what, for 20 years, Putin did not know about this? He knew and calmly measured it. What happened, because we got up from our knees and we have Zircons, successful import substitution and an increase in the well-being of the people? Have I mixed up anything? ”He only repeated Putin’s words. So what happened, that now in a hurry it is necessary to impose the Constitution, which no one respected anyway? However, no one will observe Putin’s. So what is fuss about?
        Regarding dual citizenship: is it not a paradox that people with dual citizenship decide this question - Rodnina, Isinbaeva? Are they against themselves? Do they deprive themselves of permanent residence over the hill? Let me disagree with you! "I do not believe!"
        1. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 26 New
          • 6
          • 2
          +4
          Quote: Silvestr
          He knew and calmly measured it.

          Time is running out. The situation is changing. 20 years ago we would not even think about it. At the beginning of the century, I don’t remember something even talking about dual, triple and other citizenships. This was taken for granted, as it were. Many then still believed in democracy and the rule of law in the West.
      3. Lamata 14 February 2020 10: 56 New
        • 6
        • 5
        +1
        Do you even understand the meaning of this rule? in 208, I received Russian citizenship as part of an intergovernmental agreement between the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan on simplified citizenship - this is international law. and a person received citizenship if meeting the defined criteria. if it did not comply, then received citizenship in the framework of the national legislation of the Russian Federation. then, by agreement, six months a year, according to the national legislation after 5 years. Is the example clear?
        1. Romey 14 February 2020 11: 07 New
          • 7
          • 3
          +4
          Dear fellow countryman, with five years you are somehow optimistic. For days, we washed a passport with one of our compatriots, a Kazakhstani, after a nine-year saga ...
          1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 15 New
            • 5
            • 5
            0
            It depends on what he received citizenship on, in 2007 (November) I applied, on June 2008 I received. But within the framework of the agreement, and if within the framework of internal norms, such miracles happened there.
            1. Romey 14 February 2020 12: 20 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              In the usual manner. First they submitted documents, they seemed to be accepted, then they discovered that something was wrong there, but they forgot to inform. And then everything in a circle ...
              1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 46 New
                • 5
                • 5
                0
                Well, this is normal. They demanded a certificate from me that Almaty is the former Ala-Ata. and also demanded that they notarize the same issued registration document on the territory of the Russian Federation)))) I’m a lawyer, I proved to them that he is not in himself. But honey certificates from the Republic of Kazakhstan from the People's Commissariat for Drugs, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the psychiatrist did not pass, they do not believe them, I had to get there a new one. And since they didn’t want to register until I became registered with the military, and the military registration and enlistment office didn’t want to register until they were registered, I had to get the regulatory bases and the passport office again to prove that the registration was the primary military registration.
                1. Romey 14 February 2020 13: 02 New
                  • 4
                  • 2
                  +2
                  As for registration and military registration in 1994, the father was cluttered, but then the issues were resolved more easily and at the passportist level. This gimp passed me safely, because at the time of the collapse of the Union, I was already a cadet of the VVMU.
                  1. Lamata 14 February 2020 13: 31 New
                    • 4
                    • 5
                    -1
                    I then said so a passport, I will give your passport for registration, but there will be no result, after 3 days I received a passport with a stamp on registration, and a look of a pretty passport girl full of anger. Anchor them in the drawbar and not a voluntary donation to her personal budget.
                    1. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 15: 16 New
                      • 2
                      • 2
                      0
                      Why did you do this yourself, and not a lawyer? I went through the law on entrepreneurs - I tried to put the wheels in the wheels a couple of times - I came, yelled at them and all the rules.
                      1. Lamata 14 February 2020 17: 04 New
                        • 3
                        • 3
                        0
                        If you are to me, then I am a lawyer by education and work experience; such things are not new to me. As only an official you press reasonably and with the letter of the law, then the world is friendship.
                      2. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 17: 05 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        That is - all the rules?
                      3. Lamata 14 February 2020 19: 41 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        I didn’t understand the question, for our officials of norms, to chew and demand additional docks, to cover up the priest, but right now it seems to be getting better. Last year, RVP helped; in Krasnodar, they quickly received it through the center. And here came the case in the Kuban mountains, Krasnodar region, my dear mother, I thought there was no such mess. There in the best years 90 = x.
                      4. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 20: 16 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        laughing
                        Norm - it got citizenship quickly
                        It’s better not to meddle in Prikubank))
                      5. Lamata 14 February 2020 22: 24 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        Duc did not know about the jamb, about this state of affairs. No offense to you. Krasnodar officials left a rather painful impression. but I had to go there both to the prosecutor’s office and to the court of the Lenin district (well, that’s on the oilmen’s highway, and also the courts in the Stavropol region, and the cops of Krasnodar’s oddities. Although I liked the city itself, except for the center (I lived there near the hay market) Here is the Gubernsky mikro.
                      6. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 22: 45 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        The one on Stavropol is called October. The Gubernsky microdistrict may be not bad, but remote
                        The Hay Market District - yes, the old dusty center, but close to Krasnaya and ZhK Tsentralny there - also nothing like that. Near the prosecutor's office - if you cross Krasnaya and go to the Kuban - there is a good quiet center, the officials are different. Adequate enough. The cops too.
  • Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 32 New
    • 6
    • 5
    +1
    And which radish minus your comment.
    1. Romey 14 February 2020 12: 46 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      And probably the same one that drives the lazy Ukrainians and oil-hungry Belarusians.
  • ul_vitalii 14 February 2020 13: 12 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Quote: Lamata
    Do you even understand the meaning of this rule? in 208, I received Russian citizenship as part of an intergovernmental agreement between the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan on simplified citizenship - this is international law. and a person received citizenship if meeting the defined criteria. if it did not comply, then received citizenship in the framework of the national legislation of the Russian Federation. then, by agreement, six months a year, according to the national legislation after 5 years. Is the example clear?

    Of course I apologize, but just like you read hi You may be sent to clarify to everyone and everything about that and about nothing. recourse
    1. Lamata 14 February 2020 13: 29 New
      • 4
      • 6
      -2
      Yes, I am a representative of an extraterrestrial civilization, with Alpha Centauri)))) hi
  • Revival 14 February 2020 12: 02 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    And what without a constitution with dual citizenship can not cope?
    The problems of the priority of international law over national are not in nature, do not want do not sign agreements that do not suit
    1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 15 New
      • 6
      • 6
      0
      Absolutely, the power is flooding.
    2. Gost2012 14 February 2020 12: 28 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: Revival
      And what without a constitution with dual citizenship can not cope?
      The problems of the priority of international law over national are not in nature, do not want do not sign agreements that do not suit

      Perhaps you do not fully understand this question. As an example, the decision of the Stockholm court for 3 yards had to be implemented precisely for this reason. If such a rule did not exist (as, for example, in the USA), then it would not have been fulfilled, some Basmanny court could have taken a different decision.
      About citizenship is also a very important change, whatever happens to Ukraine, where not only all Saakashvili could occupy high posts, and indeed in the government there were more Varangians than Ukrainians themselves, some even without citizenship.
      These are the most important changes to the Constitution that the GDP initiated in order to strengthen the position of the Russian Federation in international confrontation, and not at all a “transit of power”. And everything else also matters, but still in relation to these - secondary.
      1. New Year day 14 February 2020 12: 51 New
        • 13
        • 3
        +10
        Quote: Gost2012
        You do not fully understand this question. As an example, the decision of the Stockholm court for 3 yards had to be implemented precisely for this reason.

        those. Do you want to not comply with the decisions of international courts? ”“ Not bad.
        Question: who will conclude agreements with you in the world if you refuse to fulfill any of them at any moment and you won’t be anything?
        And I had to execute it because some people in Gazprom work very poorly and sign contracts poorly.
        Quote: Gost2012
        About citizenship is also a very important change, whatever happens to Ukraine, where not only all Saakashvili could occupy high posts, and indeed there were more Varangians in the government,

        you were late with Wishlist

        worth a search in the new composition?
        1. Gost2012 14 February 2020 13: 01 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          Quote: Silvestr
          .
          you were late with Wishlist
          ....
          worth a search in the new composition?

          well, that is, leave everything as it should, but the proposals are bad, or what? What does your picture change or does something prove?
          It is proposed to strengthen the international position of the Russian Federation, reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen the country's authorities, limit the entry into power of people who are not oriented to the state.
          Are these bad offers or not?
          1. New Year day 14 February 2020 13: 05 New
            • 13
            • 3
            +10
            Quote: Gost2012
            What does your picture change or does something prove?

            Yes, nothing changes in principle! Where are the departed ministers? On other responsible posts!
            Quote: Gost2012
            strengthen the international position of the Russian Federation, reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen the country's authorities, limit the entry into power of people who are not oriented to the state.

            made laugh. And who prevents the work of the AP, the FSB and other regulatory bodies?
            12 senators of the Federation Council are already convicted, former senators are on the federal and international wanted list:

            - Dmitry Krivitsky
            - Sergey Pugachev
            - Leonid Lebedev

            Another ex-senator Vyacheslav Derev is being detained on charges of fraud on a particularly large scale.

            Considering that there are only 170 members in the Federation Council, every 10th person (including Rauf Arashukov) was prosecuted.
            To do this, you need to change the constitution? laughing
            1. Gost2012 14 February 2020 13: 12 New
              • 4
              • 5
              -1
              Quote: Silvestr
              nothing changes in principle! ...

              Well, he offers - and let's change.
              ....
              Quote: Silvestr
              12 senators of the Federation Council are already convicted, on the federal and international wanted list ...

              Well convicted, so what? Too bad, or what?
              We are discussing proposed changes to the Constitution. Do not need all kinds of "I knew, I did not know", "I believe, I don’t believe," "and this one has this one, this one has it," and other terry kindergartens.
              Are these suggestions, are they bad or not? Can you formulate a short, concise, unambiguous reading of the answer?
              1. New Year day 14 February 2020 13: 27 New
                • 13
                • 4
                +9
                Quote: Gost2012
                Well, he offers - and let's change.

                and changed:
                A man with a residence permit in Italy moved to the Security Council, which will soon become state
                Kozak from the post of Deputy Prime Minister transferred to the post of Deputy Head of the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation
                More examples?
                Quote: Gost2012
                Can you formulate a short, concise, unambiguous reading of the answer?

                all to maintain power. It is obvious!
                "Amendments to the constitution are accepted. (Hurray!)

                Then amendments arising from them are introduced into several federal constitutional laws. (But what about)

                One of these laws is the Federal Law “On the Election of the President of the Russian Federation”. (Not without it)

                It introduces standards that allow zeroing the counter for all presidential candidates - since the institution of the presidency has changed significantly. (New credentials and new restrictions) "
                1. Gost2012 14 February 2020 13: 41 New
                  • 4
                  • 5
                  -1
                  Quote: Silvestr
                  Quote: Gost2012
                  Well, he offers - and let's change.

                  and changed:
                  A man with a residence permit ...

                  It seems that you cannot formulate a definite answer laughing

                  What does the Golodets have to do with or without a view, and what has changed? The norm is just being discussed, it is not there until it is accepted, that is, they vote. Citizens vote against - well, that’s how it will remain.

                  Quote: Silvestr
                  Then amendments arising from them are introduced into several ..

                  No need to fantasize and ascribe to anyone their fantasies. You do not undergo chemical or surgical castration on the grounds that suddenly you are a pedophile in the future? But there is something, then it can! And yes - for example, I don’t believe you - amputation! Your arguments do not weigh much.
                  1. New Year day 14 February 2020 13: 55 New
                    • 9
                    • 2
                    +7
                    Quote: Gost2012
                    Your arguments do not weigh much.

                    yours are very weighing something:
                    Quote: Gost2012
                    the decision of the Stockholm court for 3 yards had to be executed precisely for this reason.

                    Quote: Gost2012
                    strengthen the international position of the Russian Federation, reduce vulnerabilities, strengthen the country's authorities, limit the entry into power of people who are not oriented to the state.

                    Quote: Gost2012
                    in order to strengthen the position of the Russian Federation in the international confrontation, and not at all a “transit of power”

                    Quote: Gost2012
                    and indeed in the government there were more Varangians,

                    fount of "wisdom" laughing
                2. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 29 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  The Security Council and the State Council are different bodies, and no conversion of the Security Council into the State Council is supposed. They will exist separately about each other. But at the same time, most members of the Security Council will be ex officio members of the State Council. Security Council is a small organ, the State Council is more crowded. The State Council, apparently, will be a kind of analogue of the German Bundesrat (which is by no means the second chamber of parliament).
              2. Revival 14 February 2020 13: 57 New
                • 3
                • 2
                +1
                That is, the president and the prime minister have a problem, they’re sitting and I think how could we not appoint a person with dual citizenship to the government? Damn, look, he himself came and appointed himself to the government and did not expel him, there are no powers, there are not enough amendments (((
                1. Gost2012 14 February 2020 14: 07 New
                  • 2
                  • 3
                  -1
                  Quote: Revival
                  That is, the president and the prime minister have a problem, they’re sitting and I think how could we not appoint a person with dual citizenship to the government? Damn, look, he himself came and appointed himself to the government and did not expel him, there are no powers, there are not enough amendments (((

                  Amendments to the Constitution are good because the norms of the Constitution are imperative, the Decree or the Law can be changed, adopted in a new edition or simply canceled. Amending the Constitution is much more difficult. For example, here Kiev does not agree to amend the Constitution on the status of LDNR, because then it will be very difficult to win back. The law is possible, but not in the Constitution.
                  In addition to citizenship there is also to remove the priority of international law. This is probably the most important.
                  1. Revival 14 February 2020 15: 40 New
                    • 3
                    • 2
                    +1
                    There is no priority to international law until you yourself have signed a treaty or convention voluntarily.
                    And if they themselves signed, then what will we not do? You can exit if desired from any contract.
                    Type we will sign and will not perform!
                    Not signed by myself and there is no priority!
                  2. Gost2012 14 February 2020 18: 46 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Revival
                    There is no priority to international law until you yourself have signed a treaty or convention voluntarily.
                    And if they themselves signed, then what will we not do? You can exit if desired from any contract.
                    Type we will sign and will not perform!
                    Not signed by myself and there is no priority!

                    The opinion is superficial and erroneous.
                    Article 15 clause 4
                    4. Generally recognized principles and norms of international law И international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than those provided by law, the rules of the international treaty shall apply.

                    Suggested by
                    Introduce the priority of the Constitution of the Russian Federation over international treaties (which contradicts Article 15 of Chapter 1 of the current Constitution; changing the provisions of this chapter requires the development of a new Constitution in accordance with Article 135 of Chapter 9 of the Constitution).

                    Thus, all past and future international treaties will not have priority. I'm not sure, I literally did not understand, but it seems that there is something very similar in the USA.
    3. Revival 14 February 2020 13: 28 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      The decision of the Stockholm arbitration had to be fulfilled because we ourselves subscribed to its actions and nothing to do with it.
      It is possible to waive its jurisdiction without any amendments, and even if there are amendments, its decision will be executed, since the problem is that we are dictated to recognize it or not when concluding the contract.
      The United States example is incorrect, because they send all the courts because they can, and not because they have something written, they just wrote it because they can send after the fact, but we do not.
      Since we will refuse arbitration and they will not sign a contract with us.
      Strength must also have capabilities, not amendments.
      As for citizenship, where does the amendment mean that the laws are already in short supply, the laws are no longer being adopted?
      And then Saakashvili, do not appoint "Saakashvili", do not take the "Varangians", they themselves came and sat down?
    4. Lamata 14 February 2020 19: 43 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Ema do not confuse hot with cold, Stockholm arbitration was prescribed in the contract of Gazprom and naphtha, this is a private matter.
  • domokl 14 February 2020 12: 29 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Quote: Revival
    And what without a constitution with dual citizenship can not cope?

    I don’t remember anyone, I heard a good phrase. "The shorter the Constitution, the longer the list of laws that must be adopted to implement it." Powers, duties and opportunities to be elected or appointed to presidents, deputies, officials from a certain level must be enshrined in the constitution
    1. Revival 14 February 2020 13: 36 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Of course, a constitution can also be made in 100 volumes, if everything needs to be washed out.
      Do not forget the amendment that the water is wet.
      And what is this mockery when the dual citizenship amendment was brought together to discuss people with dual citizenship, artists, athletes? Clownery?
      And will amendments be gathered to discuss criminals?
      1. Dante Alighieri 14 February 2020 14: 05 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        They also wanted to make amendments to Orthodoxy, but I'm afraid the Mohammedans will not understand. In general, I suggest art. 14 rename as follows: “Thank God, Russia is a secular state” and everyone is happy wassat
  • Dante Alighieri 14 February 2020 13: 42 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    international law should take precedence in the Russian Federation over its own

    Where do you come from so literate? Learn materiel, and do not live by slogans. This rule is valid only if the Russian Federation itself has ratified international law; otherwise, the supremacy still has the Russian Federation’s rule. Thus, if those in power keep the normative purity and do not incur international obligations incomprehensible and unusual for us (such as juvenile justice), the need for such clarifications will disappear by itself.
  • Krasnodar 14 February 2020 14: 45 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    What did they offer?
    1. Revival 14 February 2020 15: 46 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      They are struggling with a windmill, such as Russia, initially in a subordinate position to international law.
      It was as if someone had passed the law abroad and we automatically obey because of the imperfection of the constitution!
      That's where this chimera came from?
      Or, apparently, they want to prescribe in the constitution that Russia is signing international treaties, conventions, etc. he is going to execute them only if he wants, at will, when the mood comes in, but without leaving these agreements.
      Other states will probably ask to be treated with understanding.
      Wow, and many will be willing to conclude agreements with us ...
  • alma 14 February 2020 09: 57 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The topic was raised quite serious. And in the expected amendments to the Constitution, were the articles on this subject going to be edited?
    1. domokl 14 February 2020 10: 06 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      And who limited the discussion? The question is really ripe. Everyone understands that not everyone will be able to survive until the next discussion of the changes, as the Kiev mayor says, or not the mayor. Not interested
    2. To be or not to be 14 February 2020 10: 36 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      here is the problem ... laughing
      The principle of unity of form and content.
      As a special element of dialectics, which concretizes, as in a particular case, the general provision on turning into its opposite, on moving one into another, V. I. Lenin put forward the following: “... the struggle of content with form and vice versa.
      Dumping, remaking content "
      What does this Leninist formula mean?
      First of all, it means that content as a set of elements, sides, processes of each subject, phenomenon and form as an internal organization of content are a unity of opposites between which there is a constant struggle leading to the destruction of the old form, or, in the words of V. I. Lenin , to discard the form and replace it with a new form corresponding to the new content
      https://bookucheba.com/filosofiya-dialektika/printsip-edinstva-formyi-30672.html

      .... in the words of V. I. Lenin, to discard the form and replace it with a new form corresponding to the new content .....
    3. Lamata 14 February 2020 10: 58 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      So emphasis, as well, our legislation is more important. And international norms are the norms adopted by the Russian Federation as a state. For example, the declaration of human rights. That it should not be higher than the national legislation.
      1. Revival 14 February 2020 12: 18 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        So is it accepted by the Russian Federation or not? Well, recall the signature and all.
        For example, we concluded an agreement with you, I took a million from you, and then I say, oh, I won’t give it back, internal convictions do not allow me.
        Many contracts will be signed with you later?
      2. New Year day 14 February 2020 13: 02 New
        • 11
        • 2
        +9
        Quote: Lamata
        For example, the declaration of human rights. That it should not be higher than the national legislation.

        by the fact that without having achieved the truth in the Basmanny court you cannot achieve it in the ECHR! And this is money and the "prestige" of the country laughing
      3. Revival 14 February 2020 15: 58 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Two, apparently the supporters of the amendments, are sleeping and seeing the dropping of the shackles of the declaration of human rights.
        So let’s write down, the provisions of the declaration of human rights that are not convenient for us in Russia no longer apply.
        It is interesting, what provisions of the declaration of human rights do not allow people to live normally in Russia? The right to life or the prohibition of torture? What!?
        And nothing that we ourselves have developed and signed the text of this declaration.
        Here are just adherents of the intolerable priority of international norms that cannot explain something, as though we all find strength and do not comply with the provisions of the convention on the fight against corruption, here we are steadily blocking the ratification of Art. 20 on the mandatory comparison of income and expenses of officials? So how can we not comply if we have a total and mandatory priority of international standards !?
  • rudolff 14 February 2020 09: 58 New
    • 15
    • 1
    +14
    I agree completely. Already played enough in federalism nowhere else. Let there be a unitary state and yes, without any ethnic division. Regions, counties or provinces - no difference.
    Unfortunately, this is unrealistic.
    1. Snail N9 14 February 2020 10: 08 New
      • 8
      • 5
      +3
      Let there be a unitary state and yes, without any ethnic division. Districts, counties or provinces

      And the "estate code" for the heap ...
    2. ultra 14 February 2020 10: 11 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Quote: rudolff
      Already played enough in federalism nowhere else. Let there be a unitary state and yes, without any ethnic division.

      Everything mixed up in the Oblonsky house! wassat
    3. Whalebone 14 February 2020 10: 13 New
      • 6
      • 4
      +2
      Raise the retirement age - really, but cancel the national education - no? Poor you know your power. Anything will be canceled and applied if it promises earnings. Decide how to monetize the absence of republics, and see how quickly this happens.
    4. Deniska999 14 February 2020 10: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      On the contrary, it is necessary to move to ensure that the regions are able to solve their own internal problems without constant consultation with the center.
      1. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 32 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Deniska999
        On the contrary, it is necessary to move to ensure that the regions are able to solve their own internal problems without constant consultation with the center.

        This is one of the prerequisites for true democracy.
  • knn54 14 February 2020 10: 05 New
    • 10
    • 1
    +9
    Would they want to replace the jury in Sharia court in some regions ...
    1. Snail N9 14 February 2020 10: 20 New
      • 12
      • 2
      +10
      Would they not want in some regions to replace the jury with the Sharia court.

      Take a trip to Bashkortostan, there you are already waiting for "pleasant" surprises in this regard.
      1. New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 26 New
        • 10
        • 3
        +7
        Quote: Snail N9
        Take a trip to Bashkortostan

        or Chechnya
  • ultra 14 February 2020 10: 10 New
    • 17
    • 5
    +12
    There is nothing to discuss there, the main thing for the current government is to push the status of the state council into the constitution.
    1. Lamata 14 February 2020 10: 58 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      That is, in essence, the supreme authority
  • Nick Russ 14 February 2020 10: 12 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    I agree with the author. Russia is the point, so as not to give rise to the collapse of the country of various kinds of nationalists and separatists.
    And to fix in the Constitution, as suggested, the impossibility of tearing away territories (Crimea, Kuril Islands, etc.).
    1. DNS-a42 14 February 2020 10: 20 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Quote: Nick Russ
      And enshrined in the Constitution
      It’s ridiculous. This is the last thing any separatists will worry about.
    2. 1970mk 14 February 2020 10: 23 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Where have you been before? And who gave the territory to China?
      1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 10: 50 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Gorbachev. for you, I don’t think it will become news.
        1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 16 New
          • 3
          • 4
          -1
          Yes, there is no current MSH, taam and modern ones were noted, areas in the Barents Sea, on the border with China.
        2. 1970mk 14 February 2020 14: 38 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Yes you DO NOT MIX! Which Gorbachev? What did you give to China? In what year did the transfer take place? So call specifically who gave!
          2005 is Gorbachev gave away?
          1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 14: 43 New
            • 0
            • 4
            -4
            During the time of Gorbachev during the negotiations in 1987-1991, which culminated in the signing of the 1991 Agreement on the Soviet-Chinese border, it was established that the border on the Amur River should pass along the main channel of the river. send all questions to the leadership of the USSR. they started this booty.
            1. 1970mk 14 February 2020 14: 49 New
              • 5
              • 2
              +3
              I repeat to you - there is no need to talk about Badyaga .... In 2005, who signed the agreement? In 2005, who gave away the territories? (Where were the patriots? Where did they put their tongues in 2005? Why was there complete silence on TV?)
              And why did you drag Gorbachev - he ended in 1991 ...
              So answer who in the 5th year of "reign" gave the territory?

              The demarcation of the Russian-Chinese border took place in 2005. As a result of the interstate border in the center of the Amur River, China received a number of territories with a total area of ​​337 km² - a plot of land in the vicinity of Bolshoi Island (the headwaters of the Argun River in the Chita Region) and two sections in the region of the Tarabar and Bolshoi Ussuriysky Islands at the confluence of the Amur and Ussuri Rivers. The main part of these territories was the western tip of the Bolshoi Ussuri Island on the Amur River opposite the mouth of the Ussuri River. The island has an area of ​​327 to 350 km² depending on the season.

              On October 14, 2004, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Hu Jintao signed an addendum to the agreement on the Russian-Chinese state border, according to which demarcation occurred.

              On May 20, 2005, the State Duma of the 4th convocation ratified an additional agreement (307 deputies supported, 80 against, two abstained). On May 25, the Federation Council approved the agreement (157 senators supported it, two against it, without abstentions).

              Oh, what a Gorbachev resent!
              1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 15: 11 New
                • 0
                • 4
                -4
                just a scoundrel. he had no grounds for a decision to sign this agreement. everything could have been much more effective without it during the demarcation of the border with China. if he just gave trump cards to China from scratch. In any case, the plus is that there is no longer any dispute over the border. it's my opinion. it does not have to match with yours.
                1. 1970mk 14 February 2020 15: 12 New
                  • 6
                  • 1
                  +5
                  Yes violet to me on your opinion. Do not write nonsense ... Putin gave it in 2005.
                  1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 15: 18 New
                    • 1
                    • 3
                    -2
                    Well, you have agreed with me mine. and both violet.
                    1. 1970mk 14 February 2020 15: 19 New
                      • 4
                      • 2
                      +2
                      It is logical .... only, again, say "in 2005 Gorbachev passed"))) And there will be no questions
          2. Lamata 14 February 2020 19: 45 New
            • 2
            • 3
            -1
            Shevarnadze gave a piece of the Bering Sea to the economy of the United States 1990
            1. 1970mk 15 February 2020 02: 35 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              You don’t tell .... Our current "we won’t give an inch of land" gave land to China .... gave the disputed section of the waters of Norway ... there was a national holiday there ...
    3. Erich 14 February 2020 10: 31 New
      • 1
      • 5
      -4
      And if the people in any territory want to leave the state, then what should they do?
      1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 11: 00 New
        • 12
        • 2
        +10
        And if the people of the rest of the country are against it then how? Do not care about the opinion of the majority of citizens? This we already passed in 1991 and see what it all resulted in.
        1. Erich 14 February 2020 11: 31 New
          • 2
          • 5
          -3
          I believe that you need to listen to people in a particular region so that the person who votes for leaving the structure lives in this place. In the rest of the country, many opinions can be voted on, but it is important to hear people in specific places. As far as I know that a change in territoriality is enshrined in the Constitution (current) and territoriality can be changed through a referendum, why not leave it, the conditional Bashkiria wants to secede from Russia, vote in a referendum to withdraw, what’s the problem? And here are citizens, for example, of the Chelyabinsk region and how can they affect the choice of the Bashkirs?
          1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 12: 00 New
            • 10
            • 2
            +8
            We live in a single state, which was built by many generations of residents of our multinational country. All nations, nationalities and peoples took part in the construction of our state. Therefore, all residents must decide! That is my opinion.
            1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 02 New
              • 5
              • 5
              0
              I heard your opinion, but I believe that those who want to disconnect on the grounds of long residence and their labor complicity should not be hostages to the choice of people who did not apply this complicity in this territory))
              1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 12: 12 New
                • 8
                • 1
                +7
                I understood you. Unfortunately, we will not be able to come to a consensus.
                1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 20 New
                  • 5
                  • 3
                  +2
                  It's okay)) This is civil society, you need to come to a compromise))
              2. Dante Alighieri 14 February 2020 13: 29 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Allow some clarity. It is impossible to remove from federalism such a right to secession (the right to secede from the state) because it naturally arises from the very right to join the federation. According to the logic, federation is formed by equal subjects with sovereignty. During the unification process, they give up part of their sovereignty by delegating it to the federal authorities, which are vested with the right to make peremptory decisions that are legitimate in the entire state formation. Instead of renouncing part of the sovereignty, which is usually expressed in the loss of legal personality in international matters (regions can no longer independently conclude international legal acts) and the need to codify domestic legislation in such a way that it does not contradict federal laws, regions receive the right to represent themselves in federal authorities, and therefore to participate in the process of making national decisions. Internal customs barriers are abolished, a single currency regulation is introduced, which favorably affects the investment climate and economic development. At the same time, the regions continue to resolve their internal issues independently, only in the case of the conceptual significance of a particular issue, resorting to investment support from the federal center. The textbook example of the formation of such a federation is the USA, from the more recent - the GDR. However, in neither case does anyone require the region to waive the right to exit, which is logical since if there is a right to enter, there must be a reverse right to exit the state association, because as we recall we are talking about conditionally equal entities, joining the federation of which there is an act of voluntary expression of will, and therefore the right to secession “when the union orders to live long and the soul leaves it first” is as natural as the right to association. In essence, this is only a legally fixed expression of centrifugal and centripetal forces. No more and no less. However, so that this kind of law is not neglected, a certain framework is established for its application. For example, the classic condition sounds like: the possibility of secession from the federation is possible only in case of voluntary expression of will of the parties. Which implies that not only the subject of the federation must indicate its interest in secession from the state, but the federal center must also agree with it and such a development of events. Agree, hardly anyone in their right mind will consider a situation where, for example, Tatarstan will actively insist on its right to self-determination, while Moscow will actively support it in this right. Even in Yeltsin's times, such nonsense did not reach. It’s just that in those days the federal center didn’t have enough power to dictate its will to the subjects, and therefore there was an active bargaining over which issues would nevertheless fall into the jurisdiction of the federal center and which would be handed over to local units, which resulted in a parable " take sovereignty as much as you want, "just the phrase was taken out of context, and after that it followed" but stay within the federation. " And who did not hesitate to take on the insolent, while remaining part of the country. So the right to secession, with all its formal presence, is practically unrealizable in practice, and therefore is nothing more than a curtsy in the direction of adherence to the democratic principles of building relationships with various elements of the state. In addition, it is a very convenient tool for revising the scope of competencies of the federal center and subjects, depending on how the socio-political or economic situation requires, expressing in the refinement of previously concluded federal treaties or the conclusion of their new variations on new conditions.
                1. Erich 14 February 2020 13: 34 New
                  • 1
                  • 3
                  -2
                  It remains to make it so that it ceases to be a beautiful curtsy but becomes a real opportunity))
              3. DNS-a42 14 February 2020 16: 52 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Right. Like divorce, it is the affair of the spouses themselves, and not of all existing relatives.
                1. Erich 15 February 2020 09: 26 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  It's right))
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 36 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Erich
            I believe that you need to listen to people in a particular region so that the person who votes for leaving the structure lives in this place.

            That is, you are for Russia to cease to exist as a single state? It turned into the CIS. Not in the AWG. Otherwise it will not work. Or a single state or scatter on their own holes. What actually all democrats, liberals and other Western politicians want from us
            1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 41 New
              • 8
              • 6
              +2
              I want the regions, republic and territories to be proud that they are part of Russia and not try to get autonomy in every way. Here the work of the center should already be. If the center fails and people want to scatter according to the norms, are the people to blame for these places? I think not. When some regions give everything to Moscow and then get back kazyulki with a dirty smile? I think this is unacceptable. First, the state must create the desire for people to live in it, and then the peoples, seeing efforts, put their forces and capabilities into strengthening this country. My opinion is this. What democrats and liberals say is not interesting to me. If a single state cannot be social and oriented toward a citizen, then it is probably better for everyone individually. Better less but better than more but worse.
          3. 1970mk 14 February 2020 14: 43 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            For your information, what you say is separatism and extremism ... only for appeals to this and talk about this the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation-article .... There is no self-determination. What a referendum, when even for talking about it they plant.
            1. Erich 14 February 2020 14: 49 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              Duck, if I still called for this, wherever else went))) We are afraid of power, that's why it’s planting))
              1. 1970mk 14 February 2020 14: 51 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Duck, I said this just so that you understand - what you wrote about this nonsense ... nothing more ..
                1. Erich 14 February 2020 15: 30 New
                  • 4
                  • 2
                  +2
                  Everyone has their own opinion))
      2. Nick Russ 14 February 2020 12: 15 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        ,, And if the people in any territory want to leave the state, then what should they do ?,

        The right of one ends where the right of the other begins. This applies to the people, and even more so if the other is an absolute majority.
        1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 21 New
          • 3
          • 5
          -2
          It would be strange if the whole house decided that I had pink wallpaper in my room, right?)) I guess this is my business))
          1. Nick Russ 14 February 2020 12: 41 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            ,, It would be strange if the whole house decided that I had pink wallpaper in my room, right?)) I guess it's my business)) ,,

            Wallpaper can sculpt any (if the wife allows). And you are unlikely to be allowed to break the house, separating your room.
            1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 43 New
              • 2
              • 5
              -3
              That's right, so I pack my things and “take out” my house separately and myself deal with heating, water and safety. This is very superficial but the meaning, I think you understand))
              1. Nick Russ 14 February 2020 13: 04 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                ,, That's right, so I pack my things and “take out” my house separately and myself deal with heating, water supply and security. It is very superficial but the meaning I think you understand)) ,,

                Come to a desert island or to Antarctica or somewhere else, and your room will go to others who want to live with us in the same house, called Russia.
                1. Erich 14 February 2020 13: 27 New
                  • 2
                  • 4
                  -2
                  It’s good that not all people reason the same way you do))
  • To be or not to be 14 February 2020 10: 13 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    13 February 2020 year
    17:15
    Moscow region, Novo-Ogaryovo

    Vladimir Putin met with a working group to prepare proposals for amending the Basic Law of the Russian Federation.
    http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/62776
    And here the results of the meeting were knocked out:
    "Key ideas from the meeting between President Putin and the constitution working group:
    1. Indexation of salaries and minimum wages is not lower than the subsistence level.
    2. Indexing social benefits.
    3. All-Russian voting. Plebiscite.
    4. Voting on a weekday.
    5. Russia is a victorious country. Need to think.
    6. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
    7. Securing the role of science.
    8. Prohibition of alienation of territories. ""
    https://e-news.pro/in-russia/319285-putin-vstrechaetsya-s-rabochey-gruppoy-po-podgotovke-predlozheniy-o-vnesenii-popravok-v-konstituciyu.html
    There are holes in the kettle to let off steam .. and it’ll rip the lid off ..
    1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 18 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      Marriage - The union of a man and a woman. A family code is not enough? And to fix in it, marriages between persons of the same sex are not allowed.
      1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 23 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        These are just formal documentary things. If gay people are not given the opportunity to register their relationship, I do not think that they will be very worried about this))
        1. Lamata 14 February 2020 12: 34 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Rear-wheel drive and so live together and do not hide. they also want to get the right to adopt children. What does a gay couple teach a kid? And what will the kid be? On the path of Europe to go? Where in schools they are rushing about self-restraint what you want to become !!! Parent No. 1 and Parent No. 2. The first word of the child is MOM !!!
          1. Erich 14 February 2020 12: 36 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            Nothing good (at least in the area of ​​family relations). I’m saying that what is the point of fixing questions about marriage and discussing the Family Code, if it still doesn’t bother anyone)) And of course I’m opposed to getting the right to adopt children. And live, let them live)
    2. AK1972 14 February 2020 12: 46 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Quote: To be or not to be
      Marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

      On this occasion, the president expressed his firm opinion: "We will not have parent 1 and parent 2, at least as long as I'm president." Doesn’t resemble anything?
      1. New Year day 14 February 2020 12: 54 New
        • 15
        • 4
        +11
        Quote: AK1972
        Sound familiar?

        1. Lamata 14 February 2020 17: 07 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          angry Do not miss gays !!!
  • DNS-a42 14 February 2020 10: 16 New
    • 7
    • 7
    0
    Comrades who stoke for a unitary state unconsciously stoke for the collapse of the country. Read the works of Stalin on the national question, they detail the problems of unitary RI, which led to its destruction.

    Well, another classic - V.I. Lenin: From the point of view of democracy, it’s just the opposite: recognition of the right to secession reduces the risk of “state collapse”.
  • 1970mk 14 February 2020 10: 23 New
    • 11
    • 6
    +5
    Yes, of course we are a federation .... Moscow metropolis ... and the rest is a colony .... which is milked ...
    Neither the Americans are milking, but Moscow. This is exactly so - the standard of living and social sphere cannot differ in one country at times. For the same work they cannot be paid differently in one country. The minimum pension in Moscow cannot be more than millions in the provinces get working.
  • New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 25 New
    • 14
    • 5
    +9
    ... federation is not standard.

    Sometimes it seems that the Russian Federation consists of Russia and Chechnya. And so is the Unitary State, where the regional authorities are rigidly subordinate to Moscow, they look into her mouth as they are appointed from there and sit on money sent from Moscow.
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In many unitary states, regions have more rights than some federations. It is not a question of the scope of powers, but the order of their consolidation and change. Austrian or German land has far less real rights compared to the Spanish autonomous region.
  • smel 14 February 2020 10: 33 New
    • 15
    • 5
    +10
    Quote: Lamata
    I will definitely vote against.

    And I will be against it, with my friends and relatives. This is not an amendment. This is laughter and an attempt (most likely successful) to push the next changes into society, which will be a burden for him.
    I believe that for a change in the better side of life in the country for people (and not for the irresponsible elite), a number of changes to the Constitution and legislation could be considered:
    1) To reject the idea of ​​forming the State Council as an authority as far-fetched and excessive for decision-making
    2) Reduce the composition of the State Duma to 150-180 and thereby reduce the cost of its maintenance. The absence of deputies at the workplace and voting for another deputy during his absence shall be considered an official misconduct, and repeated absence without a reason or illegal voting shall be considered an official crime
    3) The Council of the Federation to abolish. I do not recall the case of considering issues on which a serious discussion would be held there. And it’s not surprising, because there are appointees from the President and from the governors, who are appointed by the same President.
    4) Consider the issue of reducing the size of the presidential administration — it should not duplicate the work of the State Duma and the Government of the Russian Federation.
    5) The question of the appropriateness of the existence of the Russian Guard should be put to a referendum.
    6) Bind the wages of all public servants from the President of the Russian Federation to the last clerk to the minimum wage. To prohibit legislatively for civil servants all additional payments, odds and allowances both during work hours and upon retirement.
    7). All candidates for elected office are required by law to debate. Failure to appear for debate for various reasons is a reason for withdrawing a candidate from the current election and a ban on his candidacy for the next.
    8) Legislative ban on education, treatment, residence abroad for all civil servants and members of their families for 25 years after completion of the work of a public servant. He makes laws - he and his family should use the results of his activities.
    9) Legislative ban on entrepreneurial activity for a civil servant from the regional head of the department (department) and above and his relatives up to and including the second knee
    10) To consider as an aggravating circumstance being in the civil service in the commission of any criminal offense, as well as crimes committed in the civil service, be considered not having a limitation period

    Well, something like that. Much more could be offered. But I think enough to understand my position
    1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 10: 54 New
      • 6
      • 6
      0
      from your text two things really confuse - how do you forbid people want to be treated and what does Rosguard have to do with it?))) what is it that its presence annoys you?
      1. smel 14 February 2020 11: 17 New
        • 9
        • 2
        +7
        Why do I want to forbid people to be treated? If you read carefully, then there the question is about treatment, education BEYOND. If a deputy has passed a bunch of laws on education and healthcare in the Russian Federation, then he and his whole family should use this good, here, only here. And not just plebeians.
        But about Rosguardia, if you notice, there I propose to submit a question to a referendum (popular vote, plebiscite - if you like). People will determine for themselves what it was created for: to protect me or to warm me with a truncheon if I suddenly become dissatisfied with something.
        If you object and are sure that the deputy and other servants with families should be treated in Switzerland, Germany or other countries, and my family and I are here - explain why?
        1. carstorm 11 14 February 2020 11: 34 New
          • 6
          • 7
          -1
          no difference. the phrase ban on treatment itself sounds like a sadist. at least for the reason that there are diseases that are more effectively treated precisely abroad and you suggest these people die whoever they are. about Rosguardia, the main question is to whom do you want to redistribute its functions in this referendum? to the army? or such a question in the referendum will not sound? during special operations, 1730 armed criminals were detained, 192 armed groups were neutralized, 41 hostages were released, more than 7 thousand pieces of firearms, nearly 400 thousand pieces of various ammunition, about 1000 kilograms of drugs were seized. who will do all this work? during counter-terrorist operations, 62 members of the gang underground were neutralized, 250 caches and caches were destroyed, more than 1100 small arms and more than 97 thousand different ammunition were removed from the illegal traffic. and this? MIA?
          1. smel 14 February 2020 12: 30 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            To solve these problems you listed, there is a police force. And in its composition OMON. With the strengthening of the relevant structures in the police, it will be quite capable (and even now quite capable) of detaining armed criminals, and seizing weapons, and ammunition. In addition, I can tell you in secret that the FSB also exists in our country, it has enough L / C, military hardware, structures that can fight armed groups, the underground, destroy caches, etc.
            Let me remind you that the confrontation with the Russian Guard with various VOKhR, private security companies to protect important military and state facilities ended mainly in a victory over them. Well, this function could have been left for BB. But for this, the GUARD is not needed. It looks too much like bloating the states of the military structure, and it looks like plagiarism.
            Yes ... And kilograms of drugs, too, have someone to seize.
            1. Vaddik 14 February 2020 17: 16 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Rosguard - essentially the same functions as in BB, only the wrapper and status have changed. Riot police, the FSB and other similar structures, of course, can fulfill all the functions of the Russian Guard. But they lack mass character. Moreover, they are imprisoned for more specific purposes. Riot police - crime, FSB terrorism, i.e. power actions to suppress, destroy, seize DANGEROUS elements. And who will fight the riots, revolutions, a crowd fooled by cookies? Special services, due to their small numbers, are not. Internal troops - yes. And since the troops, it means a military or paramilitary structure, in contrast to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. I think it is right - that the BB removed from the Ministry of Internal Affairs A more accurate distribution of functions and a separate command.
        2. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 43 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Why does an adult relative have to bear some obligations because of her relative, an official or a deputy? His relatives could be against his participation in politics, they may have completely different views.
    2. Snail N9 14 February 2020 10: 59 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      Very true suggestions. Many also think so. Moreover, even the Communists in the person of Alferov "with comrades" have long submitted the same proposals to the President and the government and the Duma. Nobody even began to consider them, considering the delirium of crazy people. Thus, there is not even hope that at least one point from your proposals will be considered and accepted.
    3. AK1972 14 February 2020 12: 53 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Pavel, could deliver 100500 pluses, would deliver. You have a ready election program. If you had advanced to the presidency with her, most would have been yours, although depending on how you would have counted. And to live to see the elections with such proposals in a sovereign democracy is problematic.
    4. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      For example, I would vote against 6 or 7 of your proposals.
  • GRIGORIY76 14 February 2020 10: 39 New
    • 10
    • 5
    +5
    Do not tell my iskanders ... we are not a federation. Well, what kind of federation if the money from the regions is vacuumed into the center, and then distributed as handouts? Well, what kind of federation are we if the president can remove any governor for "loss of confidence", and then put any person for 4 years.
    Whatever good governor we choose, they can always remove and remove transfers.
    Well, for the sweet: what kind of 170 nouns are sitting in the upper house of parliament? Whom do they represent?
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 47 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      There are centralized federations in which most of the taxes are collected by central authorities. In the United States, the federal budget exceeds the budgets of all states and municipalities combined. And no one is crying about this.
  • Gardamir 14 February 2020 10: 47 New
    • 13
    • 3
    +10
    I am a supporter of a single state. What prevented the president in 2014, when his rating went off scale, for example, turning Tatarstan into the Kazan province? Accuse Lenin of mining, but do not even try to mine yourself.
    1. New Year day 14 February 2020 10: 56 New
      • 18
      • 4
      +14
      Quote: Gardamir
      What prevented the president in 2014, when his rating went off scale ...

      to do a lot for the inner life of the country. But he did not. Not lordly this is a matter of slaves to think
    2. Chervonny 14 February 2020 11: 08 New
      • 12
      • 3
      +9
      Quote: Gardamir
      Blame Lenin

      The fact is that at that time there was no other way out than the creation of a federal state. Now the times have changed. And it is necessary to create a unitary state. Although many Communist supporters will not agree with me, it’s a pity. I myself am a supporter of Lenin and Stalin and respect their work and the principles of building a state. But at present, the time of rampant capitalism, nationalism, it is possible to save the state only by creating a Unitary device.
      1. Gardamir 14 February 2020 11: 24 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        I totally agree.
      2. Romey 14 February 2020 11: 46 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        In general, I agree, but only at that political moment. In the 20-30s, it was necessary to slow down further federalization and be much more careful with cutting the admiring pages ... Well, okay, what happened was gone. Strange as it may seem, the present demands to close our eyes to many very controversial moments of the past so as not to lose the future at all. The time has come for the patriots, if they are patriots, to put out the civil war and the first decades of the Soviet state. I suppose like-minded people understand the meaning of this phrase.
        1. Chervonny 14 February 2020 12: 08 New
          • 13
          • 2
          +11
          Quote: romey
          disregard the civil war

          Who is against it. It’s just that there are those who are beginning to rewrite our history and here you are already beginning to understand that the civil war unfortunately has not ended.
          This is not even about like-minded people. The patriot will always understand who and what he means by saying this or that phrase in the dialogue, despite the political views.
          The thing is that sometimes inveterate scoundrels and traitors are hiding behind a mask of patriotism, as it were right to say, well, let's call them “supporters of the Western development path”, which is not good for everything in our country.
          1. Romey 14 February 2020 12: 24 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Your last paragraph perfectly characterizes the people who govern us today. Absolutely agree.
        2. DNS-a42 14 February 2020 16: 54 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: romey
          The time has come for the patriots, if they are patriots, to put out the civil war and the first decades of the Soviet state. I suppose like-minded people understand the meaning of this phrase.

          If the "patriots" want to quickly ruin the country, then let them cancel federal relations. The example of unitary Ukraine shows very clearly that the national question cannot be suppressed by any legal crocheting.
      3. DNS-a42 14 February 2020 16: 59 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Red
        But at present, the time of rampant capitalism, nationalism, it is possible to save the state only by creating a Unitary device.

        The problem is that in the era of capitalism a multinational unitary state, as a rule, is extremely unstable. Capitalism is the pope of nationalism. Capitalism inevitably contributes to the creation of nation-states, which are the most stable entities in this system.
        1. Romey 14 February 2020 17: 25 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          You are mistaken, feudalism is in our yard, not capitalism. And under feudalism, centrifugal forces always prevail.
    3. domokl 14 February 2020 12: 40 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Gardamir
      for example, turn Tatarstan into the Kazan province?

      The Constitution of the Russian Federation
      1. Gardamir 14 February 2020 12: 53 New
        • 7
        • 4
        +3
        Well, the Constitution can always be adjusted. At one time, without much noise, they changed 4 years to 7.
    4. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 18: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Obviously, he did not consider this expedient; he was against it. And what would change? Anyway, there would be a Tatar majority in this region, and the majority of officials and deputies would be from among the Tatars. A differentiated approach is needed. Here Karelia or Khakassia could be transformed painlessly into oblasts with the separation of national regions and village councils in places of compact residence of Karelians, Vepsians, Khakasses.
  • prior 14 February 2020 11: 02 New
    • 8
    • 4
    +4
    I’ve been working with documents all my life and I know for sure that there are no absolutely perfect documents.
    Everyone always corrects something, changes something, changes and adds something ..... But it’s not at all a fact that changes in a document will change the situation in life for the better.
    So with the amendments to the Constitution. Well, why do you need this booth with amendments now?
    What will he give to a long-suffering country? Will fix the beggarly allowance for the poor and the unlimited power of lawless people?
    Then why?
    I think in order to divert the attention of people, society to useless actions, useless chores ... to distract from the really significant - the crisis of the system, the crisis of power.
    1. Dante Alighieri 14 February 2020 13: 56 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      I will support. The American Constitution is 300 years old, during which time no changes were made to it. They changed sub-constitutional acts, changed federal laws, but did not touch the constitution. Why? Is she so perfect? Of course not. It’s just a symbol. Symbol of stability. Symbol of the fact that the law is not changed. That another 200-300 years will pass and the law will still be at the forefront. Exactly the same thing with the American currency, so that it doesn’t happen on the unit, there will always be Washington, on the two - Jefferson, on the five - Lincoln, etc. and larger than Franklin, that is, $ 100 will be nothing. And this is also a sign of stability, and not that inflation is absent as such.
      1. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 14: 49 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        The Constitution of the United States is amended
        1. Dante Alighieri 14 February 2020 15: 11 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Yes, I forgot a little, I confess. But, by the way, of all the amendments to the US constitution, not one has radically revised the rules of the game. Complementing supplemented - no doubt, but did not change the existing system. Perhaps the most important thing was the Bill of Rights adopted 10 years after the publication of the Constitution, the abolition of slavery after the Civil War, and the introduction of universal suffrage in the 1920s, shortening the electoral cycle and the number of presidential terms in the 50s. Everything else is purely technical. And again, all of them only supplemented, sometimes slightly corrected the existing system, but did not radically revise it, introducing new variables, such as the state council, etc.
          1. Krasnodar 14 February 2020 15: 12 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Yes, I agree
  • Olya Tsako 14 February 2020 11: 11 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    And why did the commission on constitutional amendments include several lawyers and hundreds of artists, athletes, and other very incompetent respected people. Maybe they do not know much in the laws, but in a disciplined manner they vote in favor.
    1. Gardamir 14 February 2020 11: 26 New
      • 12
      • 3
      +9
      A certain patriot of Putin, but not of Russia, because she lives in Monaco, admitted that she had not read the Constitution before. And now she will amend the Constitution.
  • Warrior MorePhoto 14 February 2020 11: 18 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    Quote: Lamata
    Platoshkin reasonably covers. although rude and no no distorted. But in any case, I am supporting him. and I will vote for his ideas.


    I agree. So do I.
    One of the things that I really liked and liked
    -How do you want to become president?
    - So that after the presidential term, calmly walk the streets.

    A person just thinks about PEOPLE of his country sincerely and as I see it honestly.
  • Warrior MorePhoto 14 February 2020 11: 29 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    I will say this, I did not even read the article!
    BECAUSE the great one just needs to go to the pensioners' apartment and drink tea with them and find out how to live on 12 rubles.
    Go to a young family and learn how to live with a child and how to grow a kindergarten, school, institute at the stages.
    Then combine this picture together and understand the results of your work.
    Let me remind you that the friends ONLY have a salary of 1-5 million per day!

    Not about constitutions and federations need to think! Economics, medicine, education, social sphere ... the rest is then somehow.

    Ps
    He will cure the children of his country, and then you can help Syria, Notterdam, de Paris and everyone else.
  • Warrior MorePhoto 14 February 2020 11: 33 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Quote: Gardamir
    A certain patriot of Putin, but not of Russia, because she lives in Monaco, admitted that she had not read the Constitution before. And now she will amend the Constitution.


    To read does not mean to understand!
  • Nitarius 14 February 2020 12: 05 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Empire and Basta .. we can’t be different .. we are a NORTH civilization .... and God is with us! so .. Unity and collegiality.
  • Roman070280 14 February 2020 12: 29 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Federation, shmederatsiya ..
    Here, as in another case - on the one hand, according to the UN Charter, anyone has the right to self-determination, on the other hand, again, by law, you are a separatist ..
    1. Vaddik 14 February 2020 16: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      In principle, true. If separation was prevented on their land, then they acted on the basis of local laws on collegiality, indivisibility, unitarity, etc., i.e. in state (national interests). And if in a foreign country the separation was muddied, it means that they acted on the basis of the UN Charter on self-determination, despite the fact that this country has its own unitarity law. Double standarts. Double standards are such a thing - that it’s better not to blame anyone for applying these same standards, because in each country they are applied in one way or another. In this particular case, no country wants to lose part of its territory, but with pleasure would have joined part of another country.
  • Krasnoyarsk 14 February 2020 14: 02 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    = And the local parliament is the meeting of the most respected people in the republic. =
    You made me laugh, thanks.
  • Lexus 14 February 2020 14: 22 New
    • 13
    • 3
    +10
    Alexander, all the amendments, except for one, are just a “gift wrapper” for the only one for which everything is started. Whatever you call it, but in the end the pompous "ascension to the throne in the shroud of empty promises."
  • Brigadier 14 February 2020 14: 28 New
    • 7
    • 4
    +3
    The main amendment to Putin’s Constitution is PUTIN FOREVER !!!
  • Dima 27 14 February 2020 14: 57 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    For some reason, when discussing amendments to the constitution, the issue of the status of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is not discussed. Everyone knows that this is a private office that does not report to anyone and does not report to anyone, but no suggestions for correcting the situation are heard!
    1. fk7777777 15 February 2020 09: 08 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      This is a branch of the US Federal Reserve, the State Bank was under Stalin I.V., and 1950, the second time the USSR switched to the gold standard, and then organized a coup d'état and a khrushche in power. Everything is subtle, so that it is cut open with cannibals. Ilyich was also removed for this with Krupskaya’s hands, he provided the ruble with gold.
  • demo 14 February 2020 15: 03 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    The national republics in our constitution are actually called state entities, they have their own constitutions. Regions and territories do not have this right. There are only charters. Hence the talk of "we are in our land," "we will protect our land."

    We have a unique situation in our country.
    Many of the states that entered the Rus-Russian Empire — the Russian Empire, were not subjected to complete assimilation and erosion, but retained quite clearly defined state features.
    And the title of the last Emperor of the Russian Empire is noteworthy:
    The full title of the last Tsar of Russia was as follows: “By God's merciful grace Nicholas II, emperor and autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; king of Kazan, king of Astrakhan, king of Poland, king of Siberia, king of Tauric Chersonesos, king of Georgia; Sovereign Pskov and Grand Duke Smolensky, Lithuanian, Volyn, Podolsky and Finland; Prince of Estland, Livonia, Courland and Semigalsky, Samogitsky, Bialystok, Korelsky, Tver, Ugra, Perm, Vyatka, Bulgaria and others; the sovereign and the Grand Duke of Novgorod of the lower lands, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsky, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Belozersky, Udora, Obdorsky, Kondi, Vitebsk, Mstislavsky and all the northern countries; and the sovereign of Iversky, Kartalinsky and Kabardinsky lands and regions of Armenians; Cherkasy and Gorsky princes and other hereditary sovereign and possessor, sovereign of Turkestan; Norwegian heir, the Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Ditmarsensky and Oldenburg and the other, and the other, and the other ”In some law-specific cases, an abbreviated form was used:“ God's mercy, Mercy, We, Emperor and Autocrat All-Russian, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod ; Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Poland, Tsar of Siberia, Tsar of Khersonis of Tauride, Tsar of Georgia, Grand Duke of Finland and others, and so on. ”

    And the coat of arms


    If the empire would develop in a different scenario - if they came, slaughtered soldiers, aristocracy, women and children into slavery, then this would be one conversation.
    But everything was different.
    The top leader was changing. and everything else remained as it was.
    From here all legs grow.
  • Alnair 14 February 2020 16: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Russia cannot be made a unitary state — we have too many different peoples, different climatic zones, different, sometimes fundamentally different problems. Local government allows you to adapt to local requests.

    One could try to consider the idea of ​​creating a "Russian Republic" by simply combining all the central regions. But from a political point of view, this would be a mistake: it would further isolate the Russians from national minorities and simplify calls for separatism.
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 19: 21 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Russians are absolutely numerically predominant in the Ural region, and in Siberia, and in the Far East. In almost a third of the republics (such as Karelia, Khakassia, Adygea, Mordovia, Buryatia) they absolutely prevail, in a third of them, although less than half, but nevertheless they make up the relative majority, they are the largest population group (example Bashkiria, Mari El). In Tataria and Yakutia, slightly more than half of the population are Tatars and Yakuts, but Russians are not much inferior to the titulars in terms of numbers, and in a number of districts and cities that make up a significant part of their population, and in which a significant part of the population lives, Russians make up a clear majority. Chuvash prevail in Chuvashia, but they are Orthodox, Russians, who make up a quarter of the population of the republic, never had any special problems with them. Plus, we must remember that most Tatars, Mordovians, and a number of other peoples having republics live outside their borders. In the Russian Republic would have to include the territory in which more than 90% of the population of the Russian Federation live. It would include the entire territory of the territories, regions, Moscow, St. Petersburg, and partially or fully the territory of most republics. What's the point of this? If, as you propose, to create it only from the central regions, then what is the point of not including other regions with the Russian majority in its structure, that is, discrimination against Russians who are numerically predominant in other regions? Are they different from the Russians of Central Russia?
  • Lamata 14 February 2020 17: 09 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Vote for New Socialism and you won’t lose.
  • Siberiak 14 February 2020 19: 11 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Maybe I didn’t understand something? You suggest:
    ... introduce a norm according to which each subject of the federation has the right to have its own legislation, taking into account the national characteristics of the region.

    And claim that:
    Nothing terrible will happen if some law in certain regions is tougher or, conversely, softer than the federal one, in accordance with local traditions and customs.

    Are you serious?
    1. Lamata 14 February 2020 19: 46 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Yeah, for the theft of the Nizhny Novgorod region, a suspended sentence, in the Republic of Tatarstan the hand will be chopped off)))))
  • Boar38 14 February 2020 21: 47 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    And I think that the law should be the same for everyone, without any discounts there on nationality and the region ... Why, then, did Penza have a conflict with the Roma? Yes, because they used to marry 12 year old girls in their camps and the law does not punish them for it, even though the law is corruption of minors ..... There is no punishment, then permissiveness ... Once you can drag your own to bed in 12 years, you can and strangers ... And why not, since you can and do not have their own punishment? Is not all nations equal before the law in the Russian Federation? Well, if they don’t put Gypsies, for weddings with 12 year olds, like pedophiles, it means problems in the Russian Federation with the enforcement of laws and equality before the law of people of different nationalities ... That’s why there is a conflict under Penza ... Although wild Caucasian weddings with shooting from AK dispersed and then progress ...
  • fk7777777 15 February 2020 08: 46 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    For example, the city of Kolpino, the city of St. Petersburg, is this how to understand? That's where the money goes, not the head of the St. Petersburg region, but the mayor of the city in the city of St. Petersburg, respectively, salaries and other buns and realities, and so much.
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 19: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The city of Kolpino is the intracity territory of the city of federal significance St. Petersburg. This is an analogue of the inner-city district. The structure of urban governance in St. Petersburg is more reminiscent of the governance structure of intra-urban regions, rather than “full-fledged” urban settlements. By the way, several cities were part of Leningrad (namely in Leningrad, and not in the Leningrad region) and in Soviet times.
  • Thompson 15 February 2020 08: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    You just need to raise the country, the standard of living in the country, and then the question of what we are and how we will disappear by itself.
    the rest is from the crafty
    1. fk7777777 15 February 2020 08: 59 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      To do this, the State Bank of the country is needed, because it’s not in vain that Ilyich has canceled all debts, there is simply a RSFSR passport and everything owes nothing to anyone, and then Visarionich organized the State Bank, where the paper, which was printed on paper, was backed up by production. The result is that in 1950 the USSR switched to the gold standard precisely because of this, they carried out a coup d'etat and put the grunts in power.
  • fk7777777 15 February 2020 08: 53 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So there is a federation and there, there is a constitution clearly, but there is confederation, that is, a constitutional federation, so there is still a fig and how this all differs from each other.
  • depressant 15 February 2020 10: 26 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Yes, dear Author, it is important to discuss any issue. You're right. This, if possible, is to discuss. But someone stubbornly deprives me of such an opportunity. It’s not the first time I’ve discovered that a hot topic arrives on my phone only the next day, in the form already discussed, and that the personal rating sometimes decreases by 1000 units overnight - while maintaining ratings for the next past replicas. I do not think that one of the colleagues advanced in such opportunities does it. And, moreover, I don’t sin on the Site Administration - why should she?
    Therefore, my attitude to the amendments is extremely wary.
    All proposed social "amendments" have long been legislative acts, the people do not read laws, therefore they do not know this. And the fact that they are often not executed does not mean the depravity of laws, but the absence of a clearly defined control mechanism and types of punishment for non-compliance. And then - how the court will sentence ...
    This is simply ridiculous: I do not respect the director, therefore I will not comply with his order. Try it. You will fly out, if not godfather, not brother, not matchmaker.
    Hit the power of the Constitution for negligent ministers? Not executive because they owe the throne? In fact, it is not obliged to them, but to the people who voted in large numbers. Oh, I remember this vote! Ancient old women, boys and girls, young families, middle-aged people with determination on their faces in droves drove to sign their own sentences! And I signed up. Under the impossibility of access to certain topics of HE.

    Well, let it be late than never.
    They say Putin can do anything. As he says, so be it. However, the circumstances brought him to the understanding that everything is possible only with the help of a constitutional club. Otherwise, "everything is possible" turns into a parody of execution. At the VO forums, the extreme limitation of Putin’s authority over the same Brezhnev has been discussed many times. So he wants to introduce his opportunity to be able to legislate everything with the help of a bizarre mix of multidirectional amendments. And after all, one thing is enough, imperceptible, it seems to be not very important, clawing as if by chance, to nullify the others at an opportunity.
    I am not a lawyer. And so I thought. As if to us with his vote, "Approval !!!" Do not tear down the combination lock on Pandora's box. Otherwise, it’s not an hour’s time, Frankenstein’s hastily sculpted monster will come out from there and yell in a terrible voice, “Now I am your Constitution !!!”
    So I think. Today I’m not given access to topics, and after voting on corrections, there will be a knock on the door?
  • kig
    kig 17 February 2020 11: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And exactly how the voting will happen, does anyone know? For each amendment separately, or in bulk for all at once, with one list?
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 19: 27 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Most likely a list. Although, it seems to me, this is wrong.
  • Pellikan 18 February 2020 23: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Maybe you need to call all the territorial entities of the provinces? And then there are governors, but no provinces. And do not tie provinces to any kind of national districts, etc.
    Does anyone know about amendments to the activities of the Central Bank?
  • 1970mk 20 February 2020 01: 40 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Discuss something? Does our "discussion" mean something? Everything has already been discussed there! And it is proposed to vote in a crowd all at once! This is not done!
    I’ll go and vote against EVERYWHERE!
    1. Sergej1972 24 February 2020 19: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I will vote in favor, because most of the amendments I personally like. But, if I were allowed to vote against those few provisions that do not suit me, I would be more pleased.)
  • Doublman 26 February 2020 19: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    No, that's enough. Have eaten.
    The only thing I would like to see in the Constitution of the Russian Federation: "A thief should be in prison!"
    Give us your earned pensions.