Post your Consitutional Amendment ideas here

[Number19]

Ok, I've only read the first page of this and I'm already disgusted. All the suggestions are to "outlaw" this or that and most of that having to do with voting procedures, campaign finance law, etc...
Do you folks really believe that is what the constitution is there for? The amendment process wasn't put in place so we could outlaw shit. The amendment process was put in place so that the rights of the people could be protected and rights that were previously overlooked and getting stepped on (such as the right of women to vote) could be enshrined in that document.
The one and only time an amendment was added to "outlaw" something, it failed miserably and had to be rescinded. All the suggestions I'm seeing are anti-constitution.

The only amendment I would personally offer would be to see our nation go to a parliamentary process so that there would be more voices from more directions in our legislature.

There are a few posters here who seem to have an understanding of constitutionality.

 

[angelatc]

1) There should be an amendment that outlaws all forms of torture, both foreign and domestic. This would immediately clear up all the BS floating around in the news today.

2) Electronics in the voting process needs to be outlawed. The includes diebold touchscreens as well as electronic scanners.

3) Political parties should be outlawed or somehow put on a level playing field with individuals.

With these three amendments 90% of all the shenanigans could be wiped out overnight.

I would like to see the 17th Amendment overturned. That would end the silly debates over term limits. Every time the governor changed, the Senator would change too. I'd take cronyism over lobbyists any day.

I would like to see the duties of the Supreme Court restricted and clearly defined. I would like to see the number of Justices firmly set, too.

I would not permit any type of secret court.

All government records would become public record after 20 years.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The civil pursuit of happiness versus legal Injudicialism

There are a few posters here who seem to have an understanding of constitutionality.

As legal business in courtrooms is divided up into criminal and civil proceedings, the legal interpretation in the U.S. Constitution is divided up into laws concerning the relationship between the state and individual civil rights. Therefore, we can divide the Constitution into two different kinds of interpretation:

1) First, we can either use right and wrong to interpret the Constitution in legal terms so that a little more than half of us, the majority, can bring a little less than half of us, the minority, to an unhappy justice; or,

2) We can use compromise to interpret the Constitution in civil terms in regards to our collective happiness as a nation.

Using the first point of view to interprete the Constitution has created a social disease in our nation called Injudicialism -- the point in which a nation erodes from its primary civil purpose of collective happiness to that of a legal system of law makers, courtrooms, lawyers and police officers.

Unfortunately, as more legal cases take place in such an Injudicial system, it needs even more law makers, courtrooms, lawyers and police officers to grow and function. Eventually the nation's economy becomes a shambles because of high taxes while its legal system becomes criminalized to the point that no amount of prisons can house the millions of prisoners produced.

So, as an Injudicialized nation produces law makers, courtrooms, lawyers and police officers as its offspring, countless prisoners in prisons become its waste byproduct. This system will ultimately lead to civil war in the United States because of our shared Amercian culture to be better off dead than unhappy.

The second point of view used to interpret the Constitution entails that citizens be responsible. In such a responsible society, its people develop a common culture through the use of civil compromise rather than legal bickering. This compromising is necessary in the quest to keep our collective civil right, the happiness of every U.S. citizen, in favor of the Injudicialized system our nation has eroded to today.

As Ron Paul supporters, we are a movement. The media has clearly missed this phenomenon because, well, they have had a clear agenda to ignore him outright while as his supporters we are not defined in the same typical political campaigns of "leftest and rightwingers" or "liberals and conservatives." Much to the contrary, Ron Paul supporters are sophisticated in that we represent the full range of both ends of the political sprectrum.

Reconizing the greatness of what it is to be an American citizen as defined in the U.S. Constitution is what makes us cheer together as uncommon supporters of Ron Paul. Even the naive media itself has had to admit that he represents a clear portal into what is the civil purpose of our Constitution -- our collective happiness as American citizens.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

blimp!!!!


This is an important thread!

-n

 

[Fox McCloud]

Amendment XXVIII: The Constitution shall not be construed as to allow for the creation of a Centralized banking system, nor any of its extensions, and subsidiaries. It should be dually recognized that the Gold Standard, defined as 1/20th an ounce of gold per dollar, be necessary and proper to protect the people and keep within sound government

This would end the Fed instantly, and greatly limit spending (it'd force a balanced budget).

Amendment XXVIV: In order to preserve properly preserve access to reliable news media, and with the intention of creating competition, it is necessary that the FCC and it's subsidiaries be abolished. Following abolishment, all Spectrum is to be auctioned off or appropriated to corporations, agencies, and organizations. All spectrum is to be recognized, by the government and individuals, as private property.

Amendment XXX: A strict interpretation of the Constitution is to be required to preserve the Liberty and Freedoms of the people--Any public entity or officeholder involved in distorting, damaging, or amending the Constitution so as to create conflict, is to be punished, and the damage undone.

Amendment XXXI: Follow the Constitution, STUPID!


Here's an Amendment we will never see, but hey...if we suddenly had a whole bunch of people following the philosophy of liberty...maybe one day we can establish an Anarcho-Capitalist society (won't ever happen, and I don't really support the idea...but hey, it's just an idea).

Amendment CCXVII: In keeping with the philosophy of Liberty and Freedom, it is deemed necessary to abolish the State, and all forms of government, in accordance with establishing a Maximum Effective Free Market mechanism, and Maximum Effective Civil Liberty mechanism.

 

[american.swan]

I propose an amendment that all adults over 18 CAN vote, and all land owning adults MUST vote.

I propose an amendment that all citizens must be provided with independently researched candidate voting records and ethics violation information and civil rights information.

I propose that primary elections are state wide holidays and national election days are nationwide holidays.

I propose that before voting each voter must say a pledge that they take responsibility for any fascist activity that their candidate performs while in office and that they pledge to vote the person(s) out of office as a result of such acts.

I propose that the first ten amendments be removed from the constitution, because it is "ink on paper" and therefore currently doesn't protect us.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

Couldnt read them all but....


1 the electorial colledge will be done away with in a presidential election.

1.2 the delegates will be done away with in a presidential election.

2 There will be 2 popular votes to determine the President every 4 years. One in Feburary to narrow the field to 6 candidates, and a final vote in November to detremine the winner.

3 All news outlets (paper and media, video) will be held accountable under the penalty of fines for each infraction of biased reporting and or supporting any one candidate. All new outlets must give equal coverage to all candidates after the first Feburary popular vote.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

And....

3... Each of the 2 popular votes in Feb and Nov must last for 1 week...Sunday at 12:00am to Saturday 12:00pm to ensure that all people get a chance to vote so as not to interfer with their work schedule.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Legal hatred versus civil happiness

Posted below are some lyrics by Supertramp from their "Crime of the Century" album that go like this:

Maybe I'm mistaken expecting you to fight
Or maybe I'm just crazy
I don't know wrong from right
But while I am still living
I've just got this to say
It is always up to you
If you want to be that
Want to see that
Want to be
That way​

The profound wisdom of this song can be used to describe a similar living situation we have in the United States today where we irresponsibly choose to be gratified by a perpetual legal system -- a system that is fueled by hatred while it, in turn, produces and fuels hatred. Instead of us choosing to deal with our collective culture as Americans, a contentment we acheive through a collective effort of discipline and compromise, we choose instead a quick fix acheived through the gratification of legal conflict.

We arrive at this cruel legal system by dividing ourselves up into a "right" party, whether it be "conservative" or "liberal," so that we can shirk all responsibility by blaming all our problems on the other "wrong" party. In order to create such a system today, we have had to create an incredibly massive and expensive network of law makers, courtrooms, lawyers and police officers. As we know full well today, for us to live in this legal money-pit requires further employment of even more law makers, courtrooms, lawyers and police officers (not to mention the countless numbers of prisons that we have had to build to house these endless numbers of prisoners created by our viscious cycle of criminalization.

So, as responsible American citizens, the choices we choose are up to us. We can either choose to interpret the Constitution in terms of our civil happiness, one which is acheived through our collective effort to compromise in order to find a common American culture -- beyond party and political lines; or, we can choose to continue to interpret the Constitution in legal terms while continuing to live in the cruel legal system such an unwise decision has produced.

Please note that the argument above isn't being made with the purpose of doing away with the 2 party system in the United States; but, rather, the argument is being made with the purpose of solidifying the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution by holding its civil intent in regards to "the pursuit of happiness" as the primary purpose over any legal interpretations one might make in regards to the document being right or wrong.

 

[Fox McCloud]

1 the electorial colledge will be done away with in a presidential election.

1.2 the delegates will be done away with in a presidential election.

2 There will be 2 popular votes to determine the President every 4 years. One in Feburary to narrow the field to 6 candidates, and a final vote in November to detremine the winner.

Totally unconstitutional...the founders put the electoral college in the Constitution to protect liberty---going to a direct democracy system would only undermine it further (besides, Democracies are the worst form of government).

3 All news outlets (paper and media, video) will be held accountable under the penalty of fines for each infraction of biased reporting and or supporting any one candidate. All new outlets must give equal coverage to all candidates after the first Feburary popular vote.

Not really Constitutional, since you're regulating the media The end problem, as I said earlier is the FCC.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

4) Knowingly authoring, or being involved in the authoring of a law that is unconstitutional

or committing a felony or violating one's oath of office in any way will result in life imprisonment.

 

[Truth-Bringer]

No future amendment may be enacted that deprives any individual of unalienable rights, personally or economically.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

The power of the Administration is the problem

or committing a felony or violating one's oath of office in any way will result in life imprisonment.

The Whig party was started because of the powers the Administration had gained relative to the powers of Congress during that time. When a Whig party President won election, they served philosophically with the idea that their position should be submissive to the Legislative branch of the Government.
Our Executive branch today has once again grown too powerful. It has grown powerful because of our own irresponsibility. We have become addicts who desire to have the Federal Government tell us what we want to hear. What we want to hear from them is that we will continue giving us our fix of free money at the expense of the livlihood of our grandchildren.
This is why our grandchildren feint when listening to Obama. They are looking for a miracle worker who will save them from being enslaved to the massive pit of debt we plan on leaving them.
In regards to anything concerning the Federal Goverment? Who cares? Isn't it about time we quit doing so? Just consider that a President should be held to such a high standard that he or she should be shot when committing just a misdemeanor against the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitituon. And yes, this would include lying about walking around the White House with ones penis hanging out while later claiming that oral sex isn't sex.
So, giving the President a life sentence for committing felonies does little more than pay a bunch of lawyers a lot of money to do nothing. Especially when you consider the next tyrant to take over the Presidency can just forgive his or her actions.
Tyrant you say? Well, Thomas Jefferson basically called George Washington a tyrant. We need to realize that tyrants are the nicest people in the world. They are well mannered gentlemen and ladies who delegate out cruelty over us because they operate and live long distances from us. They are insulated from the unhappiness we suffer.

 

[fx57]

How's this one...

Congress shall pass no law which regulates commerce within a state.

That should wipe the majority of the bad federal laws off the books, since they seem to be based off loose interpretation of the commerce clause. This includes drug laws, legal tender laws, the Fed, gun laws, etc.

It would clarify the commerce clause back to its original intent.

Here http://www.fff.org/freedom/0895g.asp they propose repealing the commerce clause completely:

Congress and the states shall make no law interfering with production and commerce, foreign or domestic.

 

[TastyWheat]

I can't put it into the right words, but we (the people) need a way to get the Supreme Court more involved. The Constitution is being spat on every day and they're using none of their power to stop it. Once they call something unconstitutional that's it, final word.

 

[Banana]

Erm, are you sure of that?

Judicial activism?

 

[acptulsa]

Amend the Twelfth Amendment so a presidential race in which the top candidate does not get 50%+1 of the electoral vote does not throw it into the House of Representatives.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Tough to beat TJ.

"I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our constitution - taking from the federal government their power of borrowing." -- Thomas Jefferson

 

[Chaotic Neutral]

I would favor an amendment that required an orderly transition from coordinated fractional reserve to 100% reserve and a reestablishment of some sort of metallic standard.

Once converted over, the amendment would abolish blanket government insurance guarantees of deposits and would prohibit government from suspending specie redemption requirements and would prohibit the emission of unbacked notes.

 

[AZJoe]

Amendment to Repeal the Constitution.