"We would be less confidential than Google" Proton threatens to quit Switzerland

Re:"We would be less confidential than Google" Proton threat... by AndrewDavis on Saturday May 17, 2025 @11:53PM (#44018889)

Even that sounds easy compared to my country. In Australia a constitutional change requires a referendum, with a double majority condition to pass. Specifically it requires the vote in over half the states to be in favour, in addition to the overall national vote in favour.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:"We would be less confidential than Google" Proton threat... by klardotsh on Sunday May 18, 2025 @12:56AM (#44019094)

That described Dutch system also sounds relatively easy compared to the US model, which requires 2/3 votes in each chamber of Congress (meaning the people-based one and the land-based one), *then* 3/4 of the states (so another land-based check) have to ratify it.

Functionally this means that in the modern political climate, the US Constitution is fully frozen with no hope of amendment really ever again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:"We would be less confidential than Google" Proton threat... by Aeolun on Sunday May 18, 2025 @09:11AM (#44021173)

Yeah, I wasn’t clear enough. The first vote (before the election) requires a simple majority vote. The second vote (after the election) requires a 2/3 in favor vote in both houses.

I’m not sure if that’s worse than 3/4 states since the Netherlands isn’t so politically localized.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:"We would be less confidential than Google" Proton threat... by JumpCrisscross on Sunday May 18, 2025 @04:22PM (#44024053)

> this means that in the modern political climate, the US Constitution is fully frozen

Would note that this is a very modern phenomenon, with Nixon having considered pushing for abolishing the electoral college in the 70s.

[ Parent | on HN ]