Constitutional Amendment anyone?

[kag]

How about stating specifically in the Constitution that corps are NOT people? We haven't had a good Amendment in a while. Doesn't this just seem ripe?

[Pryderi]

1. What would the wording be?

The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:

* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)

It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification. This point is clear in Article 5, and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v Virginia (3 US 378 <1798>):

[kag]

5. Good question...

Makes me wish I had some legal expertise. But after listening to Keith, it seems like the way to overturn a particularly nasty decision is to change the constitution. That's what happened after Dred Scott...eventually. Didn't it? 'Course it took a war to wake people up to it.

[GreenStormCloud]

2. Any 13 states can block an amendment.

It takes 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment.

Have fun trying. That is an issue that the average person doesn't understand and doesn't care about.

It would be nice to be able to stop owners from hiding behind incorporation, but first you have to get John & Jane Doe to care.

[Pryderi]

6. three fourths? I thought it was two-thirds.

[GreenStormCloud]

11. Common error.

Many people confuse the proposal process with the ratification process.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/usconstitution/a/constamend.htm

To Propose Amendments


•Two-thirds of both houses of Congress vote to propose an amendment, or


•Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. (This method has never been used.)

To Ratify Amendments


•Three-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, or


•Ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. This method has been used only once -- to ratify the 21st Amendment -- repealing Prohibition.

The Supreme Court has stated that ratification must be within "some reasonable time after the proposal." Beginning with the 18th amendment, it has been customary for Congress to set a definite period for ratification. In the case of the 18th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd amendments, the period set was 7 years, but there has been no determination as to just how long a "reasonable time" might extend.

[T Wolf]

3. Never happen. If this god-damned country could not pass an amendment to give Equal Rights

to 51% of the population, what makes you think that something as dangerous to the ruling class would stand any chance?

[Ozymanithrax]

4. It is almost impossible to change the Constitution...

Two ways to propose an ammendment:

Both Houses of Congress must propose the amendment with a two-thirds vote. This is how all current amendments have been offered.

Or

Two-thirds of the State legislatures must call on Congress to hold a Constitutional Convention.

In order to ratify the ammendment:

Three-fourths of the State legislatures must approve of the amendment proposed by Congress.

Or

Three-fourths of the states must approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. This method has only been used once, to repeal Prohibition.

*****


Show me 66 Senators and 278 Congressmen or 33 states that will propose the ammendment. Once you've done that, I will worry about enough states to ratify the ammendment.

[kag]

7. It just seems like this decision is SO distasteful to SO many people...

I guess I can dream.

[timeforpeace]

8. Founders: "What's say we include a mechanism to amend this every time someone doesn't like a Supreme

Court decision?"

[cascadiance]

9. Tell the teabaggers to call their reps/senators and say they don't want China's money controlling us

Which is what we should take as signs to teabagger rallies to prompt that conversation/action. Those people will be even more pissed than we are if they see that this decision will allow other countries' corporations to buy off our congress critters. Perhaps we can get some Republicans fearful of their job if they don't try to work on supporting this amendment.

I'm sure some teabaggers will say that only American companies can participate, and one can respond "How does the law require that? Please tell me!". And then ask how a test can even be made if a company is "American" if most of our companies are called even now "MULTINATIONAL" corporations, and have been moving to hire more people overseas than here too. How can they be delineated as "American"?

If we really go after them in their rallies to do this, then perhaps we can plant some fear in a significant number of Rethugs and Blue Dogs that even their own base won't support them unless they vote for this amendment.

[elocs]

10. It's very hard to amend the Constitution and the simple truth is that most Americans don't care.

They don't.

Many people worked hard and long to pass the ERA and that was very simple to understand and that did not succeed. I see a proposed constitutional amendment about this going nowhere fast.