Our "revered" constitution

[Pantagruel]

seems to have holes in it big enough to drive a truck through.Jut a few issues:

Emoluments clause apparently undefined and unenforceable.

Electoral college has resulted in 2 of the last 3 presidencies going to the candidate with fewer popular votes. "Will of the people", nah.

Abuse of presidential pardon power, not a major problem until we get a POTUS who refuses to follow traditional norms of decency and uses pardons to obstruct justice.

The two Senators per state concept has resulted in obscene disproportionate representation. In fact , six senators from California, Texas, and New York represented the same number of people as the 62 senators from the smallest 31 states.

What will it take to fix this?

[marie999]

1. It won't be fixed because there are enough small states to block it.

[Sinistrous]

3. True.

[Yeehah]

5. They will be fixed or the nation likely will fail

Allowing fundamental flaws in our democracy to exist without trying to fix them is unacceptable. Large states have enormous power in the House and must coerce enough states to accept constitutional amendments. A long-term campaign to effect these changes must be begun.

Of course, the nation likely will see wholesale upheaval or disintegration before any of these things happen.

[marie999]

6. Coerce? Really?

[Yeehah]

13. Coercion is a common practice in politics, business and many other aspects of life

Yes, coercion.

[BComplex]

8. I totally agree, Yeehah! Giving up on solving the problem will insure nothing ever changes.

We have to put great minds together and figure out how to solve the underlying problems of a major change, so that everyone wins, but most especially our unity stays in tact. We're coming apart with the way it is.

[Yeehah]

14. As far as the electoral college goes....

I think there are plenty of people in red and blue states that are sick and tired of their votes not counting. If we go with a popular election of the president, everybody's vote counts.

[BComplex]

16. Yep. Changing that part of the constitution will be difficult because of the money interests that

benefit from control. Right now, money interests control what wins and what loses, not the people.

[Sinistrous]

2. A unicameral legislature would be a good start.

Assuming that representation was established using a formula essentially the same as that used to apportion representation in the House.

[Laelth]

4. Only one way to fix that ... tear it up and start over.

The EC and the Senate favoring low-population states are built-in, essential FEATURES of this 233-year-old agreement between the states. To get rid of them, we’d have to have a new Constitutional Convention and start over from scratch.

I don’t see that happening anytime soon.



-Laelth

[Hekate]

27. You do know a Constitutional Convention is a Right Wing wet dream --don't you?

They already have it planned out, so be careful what you wish for.

[Laelth]

34. I don't wish for a Constitutional Convention.

But if you want to get rid of the Electoral College and take away the small states’ advantage in the Senate, that’s the only way to do it from what I can see.

-Laelth

[Angleae]

36. That won't work either.

A constitutional convention does not eliminate the need for 3/4 of the states to agree, it only eliminates the need for congress to agree. On top of that Article V also states that states cannot be deprived of equal sufferage in the senate.

[brush]

7. It can be fixed. Will it be fixed is another matter?

The Electoral College and the Senate are the two biggest sore spots IMO but both issues advantage smaller states which outnumber the larger states so it will be a hard slog but it needs to be tackled, increments at a time is probably the only way.

Starting with how Maine and Nebraska apportion their EC votes would be a good, doable start.

[Pantagruel]

9. I don't have a ready reference but

as I understand it , the Senate was designed essentially to protect slave holding states . And the EC was a failure from its earliest applications. Few in this country are aware of these issues. Maybe we need to educate them?

[intelpug]

28. slaveholding states

They were all slaveholding states when it was written.

[Voltaire2]

10. The 18 states that signed on to the Texas suit could leave the union.

Then the rest of us could amend the existing document to make a functional representative democracy.

[Pantagruel]

12. Those states mostly

get more from the Feds than they contribute in taxes. They're not leaving the Union, IMHO.

[Pantagruel]

11. Racist confederate statues are falling

maybe it's time to chip away at the racist foundations of the constitution?

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/electoral-college-racist-origins/601918/

[Irish_Dem]

15. The state of Kentucky has been terrorizing us for years. nt

[Progressive dog]

17. We do live in the oldest democracy

and the richest nation ever.
Trump will be gone in less than a month.

[handmade34]

18. "What will it take to fix this?"

an informed, educated citizenry that votes

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

19. A suggestion

Adjust the number of seats in the house as follows:
California 68
Texas 50
Florida 37
New York 34
Illinois 22
Pennsylvania 22
Ohio 20
Georgia 18
North Carolina 18
Michigan 17
New Jersey 15
Virginia 15
Washington 13
Arizona 13
Massachusetts 12
Tennessee 12
Indiana 12
Missouri 11
Maryland 10
Wisconsin 10
Colorado 10
Minnesota 10
South Carolina 9
Alabama 8
Louisiana 8
Kentucky 8
Oregon 7
Oklahoma 7
Connecticut 6
Utah 6
Iowa 5
Nevada 5
Arkansas 5
Mississippi 5
Kansas 5
New Mexico 4
Nebraska 3
West Virginia 3
Idaho 3
Hawaii 2
New Hampshire 2
Maine 2
Montana 2
Rhode Island 2
Delaware 2
South Dakota 2
North Dakota 1
Alaska 1
Vermont 1
Wyoming 1

This also fixes the EC problem.
Senators were intended to represent the states.

BTW, over 150 countries in the world have studied the US Constitution in efforts to write their own. Are there things that are wrong? Are there injustices and trampled rights? Of course. A smart man once called what we have here "the animating contest for freedom."

[former9thward]

20. You seem to have an issue with pardons.

Did you have an issue with any of the pardons Clinton and Obama gave as their terms ended?

[Pantagruel]

23. I assume the Trump pardons

will be on a scale unheard of in the past and will be construed as obstructing justice.
Not so much Clinton & Obama pardons.

[Voltaire2]

33. self serving pardons are a massive problem

Flynn for example, plus it is expected that Trump is going to issue blank check pardons for everyone around him, perhaps including himself.

This allows a president to commit any crimes he wants unhindered by indictments, due to the current understanding of presidential immunity, while he is in office, and then pardon himself and his associates on the way out of office.

You do not see a problem with this?

[former9thward]

35. I have no idea what Trump is going to do with pardons.

I will wait until they happen or don't happen. People's predictions about what Trump is going to do have a horrible record over the last five years.

We elect Presidents under the Constitution. The Constitution gives presidents unconditional pardon power (except to reverse an impeachment verdict). So I don't get worked up when they exercise their Constitutional power. If people really wanted to change it they would. In his last hours Clinton made some pardons which some found questionable. Probably the most famous was to a fugitive financier and Clinton donor Marc Rich. He was hiding from the FBI in Switzerland at the time. Another to his brother for cocaine trafficking and dealing. I did not like either one of those but I accepted his right to do it. Obama gave pardons to Puerto Rican terrorists who tried to kill members of Congress and assassinate Truman. Same thing. He had the right no matter what I may think.

[Pantagruel]

38. Marc Rich pardon

was very complicated. Rich trafficked in embargoed Iranian oil but he also was working with Mossad to secretly supply Israel with much needed fuel. Also it wasn't a complete pardon-Rich never came back to the U.S.

Trump pardons are and will be far more despicable.

[former9thward]

40. You are the only person I have ever heard defending the Marc Rich pardon.

He did not return to the U.S. because he would have faced civil suits. So the billionaire lived the life of luxury in Switzerland and the rest of Europe.

[Pantagruel]

41. Not defending Rich or the pardon

I didn't like it and Clinton admitted he wouldn't repeat it, not worth the consequences , may have cost HRC the 2016 election in a roundabout way.
But with Barak and the Mossad lobbying for it to presumably repay Rich for his work for Israel, you can understand the basis of the decision. An intense investigation yielded no charges:

"The troubling facts surrounding the Rich pardon soon triggered investigations in both houses of Congress and by federal prosecutors in Manhattan. These investigations ultimately evolved to probe whether other pardons by President Clinton were unlawful, including allegations that the President’s half-brother, Roger, orchestrated a pay-for-pardons scheme.

Leveraging its vast oversight powers, the House and Senate issued a voluminous number of subpoenas for documents and witness testimony. For example, in addition to obtaining financial records and President Clinton’s written notes, Congress also heard testimony from high-level White House officials, including President Clinton’s former Chief of Staff and former Counsels regarding their communications with the President.

In coordination with the FBI, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York also launched an investigation into President Clinton’s pardon of Rich, including allegations that the pardon constituted a bribe in exchange for money. Later, at the direction of the Attorney General, that investigation expanded to include all of President Clinton’s last-minute pardons and commutations.

Ultimately, no criminal charges were brought in connection with the Rich probe, and the criminal investigation eventually closed. The investigations also absolved the Clintons of allegations that they were involved in a vote-for-pardons scheme in connection with Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign."

[Pantagruel]

37. Pardons have now begun

never seen anything this blatantly wrong.....

[brooklynite]

21. The Constitution never said anything about the"will of the people"

Recall as well that the original Constitution didn’t allow people to vote or Senators.

[Pantagruel]

43. "Constitution never said anything about the"will of the people"

Maybe that's the problem?

[Lady Freedom Returns]

24. We need a Constitutional Convention

To work on these holes.

[brooklynite]

25. You know that conservative can propose Amendments as well, right?

[Lady Freedom Returns]

26. And so can we.

That is why the GA election has so much attention.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

32. Well, then, we'll have to get busy uniting the entire left against conservatives,

and vote them out of office until they are insignificant.

The only people who benefit from conservatives in office are the wealthy.

[moondust]

29. Step 1:

Overhaul or eradicate the Gang of Predators (GOP). They're not much more than a bunch of anarchists now who live to prevent government from doing anything.

[jmowreader]

30. You missed a huge one

There's almost no way to get rid of a corrupt or incompetent member of Congress except by voting them out. Members of the Executive and Judicial branches can be removed by the Legislative branch, but there's no similar oversight for the Legislative. And you've got to be a grade-A fuckup like Duke Cunningham before that happens.

[pecosbob]

39. I see no reason why emoluments enforcement can't be dealt with by Congress

The other two items we're stuck with I'm afraid unless we go back to ground zero, a Constitutional Convention, and in a divided electorate, that's a recipe for disaster.

[Pantagruel]

42. Emoluments charges

didn't seem to arise in the impeachment hearings, I suspect for strategic reasons.How do you figure Congress can police emoluments?

[pecosbob]

44. We were beset by a sea of troubles

Most certainly they could enhance the penalties for violations. I think they could even create an independent body outside government to audit officeholders.