Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If I could make one Amendment to the Constitution,...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:19 PM
Original message
If I could make one Amendment to the Constitution,...
Edited on Wed May-03-06 04:20 PM by Just Me
,...I would cap "INDIVIDUAL" campaign funds at $5 million with the option of sharing, EQUALLY, whatever % of public campaign funds were available.

:rofl: Imagine that!!!! :rofl:

What Amendment would you make to the Constitution?

HAD TO EDIT TO "INDIVIDUAL"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Free chips and salsa
In all Tex-Mex restaurants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowRubberDuckie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. They already do as long as you buy an entree....
OTB brings it automatically. And I recommend the Queso.
Duckie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. Introduce an amendment to reorganize the US into the Amercan Empire
Edited on Wed May-03-06 04:27 PM by Selatius
Hey, if we're living in a corporatist/fascist oligarchy, why not do away with any pretense of a healthy republic? At least the truth would be laid bare for all to see.

State governments would be abolished. States would be known as provinces from this point forward. Only the federal government would control all and be able to levy taxes. National Guard troops would serve the emperor directly. Governors would be appointed by the emperor, and the emperor would serve a life term and has the power to choose a successor.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Well, hell, you'd have to scrap the Constitution to do that.
Of course, really, you'd just have to confess that the "Constitution" has already been rendered meaningless and, therefore, we may as well start from scratch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Fixing political contributions are easy.
Donate as much as you want as an individual to whomever you want as many times as you want. No tax write off for it.

No corp money, no PAC's Nothing but individual contributions.

Each candidate must report each donation within 48 hours.

They cannot keep any of it after the election. Whatever is left over, must be given back in proportion as given.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
31. No offense but, that would create a NIGHTMARE for those tracking,...
,...all that. Trust me on this. I seriously can say I KNOW.

btw there are laws dictating what can be done with what's left over,....they should be revised. I'd suggest a law dictating all "left overs" being deposited to the general treasury. But, that would just be my suggestion. }(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. Free and open counting of paper ballots for all elections for all states.
Edited on Wed May-03-06 04:29 PM by KansDem
None of this super-secret electronic voting where nobody (but the programmer) knows the score.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
5. Corporations not treated to same rights as individuals
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. Voting restoration amendment
A citizen will get 1 electoral vote for every 20 years of life,
1 for military service, 1 for civil service, 1 for each underage minor
dependent.

All elections within 1% margin, must hold a runoff poll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. That will backfire on us
Given that so many fundie families have as many kids as Mom can churn out, I wouldn't go that route if I were you.

This is from the "be careful what you wish for; you just might get it" department.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #24
32. Age
The retired civil service will far outweigh the pregnant.

The 80-100 year old-vote would become very powerful,
3 times over the voting power of a 30 year old. It would
put age in to respect... and age seems to serve us all
up more refined, funnier and humbler... or dead. As
a generation dies, the increased voting power would compensate
for the diminishing ranks. Then a retired army seargent who's
60 and been through viet nam, has 4 votes, and a fresh babe 18
year old college student has 1 vote.

Serious measures are called for.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota Libra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'd actually make three Constitutional Amendments because without all....
.....of them the others wouldn't be very affective.

Amendment 1) Outlaw any and all private campaign financing. In other words no corporate and no personal contributions at all. A network station would be set up and devoted to nothing but campaign/candidate appearances.
(candidates would be given free air time and only enough money for travel)

Amendment 2) I would change corporate laws so that any company hiring illegal aliens could have their corporate and personal assets confiscated through $5 million fines for corporations and $1 million fines (per day, per illegal alien). No one would ever hire another illegal alien as long as they live.

Amendment 3) I would change the term for the Presidency from 2 four year terms to just 1 six year term.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSpartan Donating Member (736 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Why the third one?
I'd think that eliminating term limits would help rid us of lame duck Presidents (not that I care AT ALL right now) and force for interaction between the branches. I stress that I don't want this now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota Libra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #10
46. I didn't put in term limits as an Amendment but the third one would.......
......rid us of the Bush's of the world two years earlier than we can get rid of him now.:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSpartan Donating Member (736 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. Hear, hear!
:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
9. No. Citizen's ight to vote.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I agree, completely!!! A mere "law" outside the Constitution isn't,...
,...good enough!! Moreover, that amendment should make it a crime of treason for obstructing that basic right!!! :patriot:

I'd still simulataneously advocate a CAP on money being the control over the existence or execution of a more pure democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BooScout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
11. Equal Rights Ammendment. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poiuyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
13. Eliminate the Electoral College
I'd like to see some form of Instant Runoff Voting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. That has bothered me a LOT, too, because it's disabled a fair election.
I don't know how to fix it, though, because it was suppose to operate as an organized means of assembling the people's power. I haven't thought that through. Maybe, breaking it down further/closer to the people would be an answer.

Perhaps, you have thought that system out better than I and have suggestions about how to either make it work towards strengthening democracy or simply creating another means of maintaining democracy.

Honestly, I don't even know what you mean when you say, "I'd like to see some form of Instant Runoff Voting". Sorry for my ignorance,...but I am very interested in your idea/l.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poiuyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Instant Runoff Voting is nice because a 3rd party candidate wouldn't
be a spoiler. I prefer the Condorcet method.

Instant-runoff voting (IRV) (also known as the Alternative Vote and by several other names) is an electoral system used for single winner elections in which voters rank candidates in order of preference. In an IRV election, if no candidate receives an absolute majority of first preferences, then the candidates with fewest votes are eliminated one by one, and their votes transferred according to their second and third preferences (and so on), until one candidate achieves a majority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

Here's a simple animation showing how IRV works:

http://www.chrisgates.net/irv/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. That is a VERY attractive alternative that would enhance democracy.
I like it!!!! Thank you for sharing that!!! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CPMaz Donating Member (246 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
16. Eliminate consideration of the corporation as a person under the law
The corporation is fine as a way to organize a business, but it's not a person and has no rights, not free speech nor religion nor anything else.

If you think a corporation should be considered a person for the purposes of the law, then I challenge you to pick your favorite corporation, and find a judge.

Have the judge issue a subpoena, summons, or writ of habeas corpus for that corporation to show up in court.

*The corporation.* And only the corporation.

Not an officer of said corporation.

Not a lawyer for said corporation.

Not an employee of said corporation.

Not a shareholder...

Not a representative...

Just the corporation.

It won't happen. It physically CAN'T happen.

Corps. are not human.

Ergo, they have no human rights. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
screembloodymurder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I agree.
and we must eliminate corporate lobbies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. I'd allow the entity the privilege to sue or be sued BUT THAT'S IT!!!
Edited on Wed May-03-06 05:53 PM by Just Me
I'd be tempted to destroy the concept of a "corporation" altogether since there are so damn many laws created to protect its "owners" rather than hold ownership legally responsible.

It's a freakin' entity created to provide shelter from personal responsibility of all those in-corporated into its existence (ESPECIALLY THE CEOs WHO ABUSE THE PRIVILEGES IT SHOULD NEVER HAVE RECEIVED).

I think I'd actually advocate destroying the concept of "corporation", period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
21. Keep the oil / energy industry out of the government
Edited on Wed May-03-06 05:54 PM by EOO
This would be the wording:

Article I:

Persons who are currently employed by energy industries shall not hold office of the president, vice president, or senator and state representative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. ,...religious and military, too!!! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Well....
Religious should stay out of the government, period.

As for military, I would have no problem with that as long as they actually served in the military (and can prove it).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. I should have been more clear: military industrialists with a history of,.
,...profiteering off non-defensive activities (or something like that). You could probably refine that better than me but I know you know what I'm talking about. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #29
43. Like Halliburton, for instance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
22. We'll call it "George's Amendment"
"Any citizen of the United States, who is related by bloodline to anyone directly supporting a fascist or otherwise totalitarian regime, is forever barred from holding an elected, appointed or directly-hired government job at any level, with exception that he may serve as an enlisted rank in the Armed Forces of the United States."

Google "Hitler's Angel" if you don't quite understand why we need this.

The "directly supporting" is necessary because through our purchases of Chinese-made goods we all indirectly support totalitarianism. The specific intent of this amendment is to get the Bushes permanently out of government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. AW SHIT!!! I rather like that,....very, very much!!!!
EXCELLENT AMENDMENT!!!! Add associations with "totalitarian" governments which engaged in genocide and/or human rights abuses having lucrative financial dealings with individuals seeking office in the U.S.A.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. "George's Amendment", version 2
Edited on Wed May-03-06 06:02 PM by StopThePendulum
"Any citizen of the United States, who is related by bloodline or marriage or other domestic partnership to anyone directly supporting a fascist or otherwise totalitarian regime, is forever barred from holding an elected, appointed or directly-hired government job at any level, with exception that he may serve as an enlisted rank in the Armed Forces of the United States."


This will also prevent stepkids, mistresses or (straight or gay) lovers of those directly supporting totalitarian regimes from holding any government job, elected or otherwise, except for enlisted personnel in the Armed Forces.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #28
35. If you're talking direct relations, okay
I can see the point in keeping Pickles Bush from running for office.

I'm worried that the Repukes would use Maria Shriver's marriage to Arnold Schwarzenegger (whose daddy was in Hitler's army) to keep the Kennedys out of public service...even though you've got to go through a lot of cutouts to link Hitler to Teddy Kennedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
26. One term limits for President
the House and Senate.

Fresh blood every two-four-six years just sounds good right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. How's about ONE five-year terms.
I'm thinking,...it takes more than two and less than six years to exact really aweful damage. Maybe, a five year term limit would be a good thing.

On the other hand, :rofl: maybe we should make those fuckers run every single year!!!! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
33. Outlaw any fund-raising activities by an elected or appointed official
... while in office. While holding office, their services should be 100% dedicated to serving the people - not those who can afford to pay for access. It's a "personal service contract" and not at all radical. I'd permit no elected or appointed public official to even engage in fund-raising for the campaigns of others, their won campaigns, or even a charity. None. Zip. Nada. (It wouldn't require a Constitutional Amendment, either.)

If I were to amend the Constitution, I'd prohibit any corporation (which is PROPERTY) from 'owning' and other corporation (which is PROPERTY) ... just like a dog can't legally own a house!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
34. That whole women's right to vote thing
Been downhill since then.


Just kidding! (And I'll still get flamed for it.) :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCentepedeShoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
36. Can I have 3 ?
1) ERA - duh

2) Paper ballots and hand counts only. Who cares if it takes a month to determine the winnner - we had that in '00 and look where it got us.

3) One 5 year term for Prez. And if you were VP you can't run for your own Prez term. No coasting in. Do it the first time.

4) (Yeah, I know, I lied) And this may be more state than fed. I'd like all party primaries be held on the same day. Lay it out and let us vote. And if a candidate gets on the primary ballot of 2/3 of the states, he or she is on the ballot of all states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. *LOL* Oh, yes,...you certainly have the liberty to offer those four!!!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedG1 Donating Member (389 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
37. repeal the Twenty-second Amendment...
I WANT CLINTON AND THE GOOD TIMES BACK...

oh we so miss him



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. Wanna' explain ratification et al?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedG1 Donating Member (389 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Ratification of the United States Constitution...
Ratification: the act of ratifying; the state of being ratified; confirmation; sanction; as, the ratification of a treaty.

An amendment cannot become law until it is ratified by 3/4 of the house. However, the IRS and income tax collection is also an amendment that was never ratified.

Two proposals were made in February 2005 to repeal the 22nd Amendment....HJ RES 9 and HJ RES 24.

BOTH remain locked up in the Subcommittee on the Constitution.

*Could* the 22nd Amendment be repealed? Theoretically YES, but this bill hasn't gone anywhere in over a year.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Are you saying it's NOT an amendment?
:7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adwon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #40
48. The 16th was ratified
The fake controversy over the fact that some states had slightly different wording, and poor grammar, in the versions of the amendment they sent to the Secretary of State is irrelevant. It was certified as good and the very issue has been spoken to by the Supreme Court, which ruled that the states were in substantial compliance with the requirements of passing an amendment. This is an old wingnut lie, don't get caught up in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-03-06 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
41. Simple: A constitutionally guaranteed Right to Privacy.
Edited on Wed May-03-06 09:11 PM by Perky
Libertarians and Dems would support it.. even a good number of Christo-fascists would have a hard time saying no to it on the government intrusion angle. They certainly would struggle with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
44. Clarify the constitutional definitions of treason and impeachment
IE - what exactly it takes for an impeachment proceding to being.

Good example - war based on lies

Bad example - blow job
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
45. P.S. We Really Mean It

Article XXXVI.

Regarding that whole Separate of Powers thing, we were serious.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-04-06 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
49. Definition Of Citizenship and Personhood
That definition would be clearly that of a human being and an individual. Groups, organizations, and corporations would not have the identical status of a single citizen.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC