Is 27 Enough?

We’ve talked a bit about original intent and whether it even matters now. So you want to end the debate on what the Founding Fathers wanted when it comes to (insert contentious issue here)? Amend the Constitution! Become your own founding father, with your own original intent!

So my question for today is: Would you like to see a 28th Amendment to the Constitution? If so, what?

Quick programming note: I’m on vacation, so my opportunities to comment today will be limited. But I’ll dip in when I can–I’m curious about what pops up here.

15 thoughts on “Is 27 Enough?

  1. Prohibit individual and corporate donations to fund campaigns and move to a public financing system. (Given past SC rulings this would probably need an amendment to bypass the “free speech” clause (and how spending money is protected “speech” is beyond me.))
    Another: Strip corporations of “personhood.” I considerSanta Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. (1886) to be the worst SC decision that we still have to live with. It’s a monument to corrupt “judicial activism” – at leastBush v. Gore is barred from being precedent.
    Mostly, though, I prefer to leave the Constitution alone.
    .

  2. joejoejoe says:

    #28 – All legislative business will be decided on the basis of a simple majority. (end filibusters and 2/3 treaty requirements)
    I’d also like to see an amendment ending the practice of holds on legislation and appointments as an internal rule. Basically I’d like some tweaks giving the Senate a hard kick in the balls to motivate them to join the roster of modern democracies.

  3. missy says:

    Money ≠ Speech
    Corporations ≠ Persons

  4. k says:

    Um, wasn’t there some noise a while ago about an equal rights amendment?
    Do it, or you’ll never get the flying cars.

  5. Sandman says:

    Public financing of all political campaigns; no private, PAC or corporate political donations of any form.

  6. Jim Pharo says:

    End the Senate. The Bill of Rights as enforced by the Supreme Court is all the protection the minority needs.
    Stop the madness of letting Wyoming and its ilk pillage the treasury.

  7. RickDFL says:

    Abolish the Senate. Treaties ratified by majority vote of House. Impeachment requires 2/3rds vote of House.

  8. Bmore says:

    I’m torn…
    Impose a fuel tax on fuel diesel of an addition $1-$2 dedicated to carbon sequestration research. Additional funds provided by a carbon tax ON EVERY VEHICLE owned or rented by a corporation or used in the service of a contract where the point of service delivery is in the United States – including earth moving equipment – implemented probably as an annual license to operate the equipment – where the dollar value of the permit is based on the pollution output of the vehicle.
    The other version is a corporate transaction tax for every purchase of goods, contract labor, services and importation of goods, contract labor or services purchased in another county and delivered in the United States to avoid the transaction tax.
    The transaction tax replaces the corporate income tax – and simultaneously explictly removes personhood.

  9. pansypoo says:

    public funded campaigns. all money goes into a pool. free teevee. NO CORPORAT CAMPAIGN BRIBES.
    and what missy said.
    can we outlaw gnews? IOKIYAR? gnews teevee?

  10. MapleStreet says:

    I agree with joejoejoe that the many of the arcane parlimentary proceedures stall anything being done. While they may have originally have been instituted to assure an orderly meeting (a Roberts Rules of Order), there is a whole industry intent on using them to wreak havoc. Furtunately, that isn’t a constitutional question and can be revised by a simple agreement of Congress.
    But my big wish is to have a test before you can vote. I know that poll tests have a sordid history in the US. I also know that the ability to read doesn’t equate with the ability to analyze the politicial issues. Because of that, I’m not saying a writen test.
    I do however, wish that there were some way to insure that those people voting have made at least a modicum of effort into becoming aware of the issues.

  11. zemo says:

    What spork et al. said.
    What the originally-conceived would-be 11th Amendment would have looked like:
    http://soundingcircle.com/newslog2.php/__show_article/_a000195-000205.htm
    Ah, Mr. Jefferson. If only.
    Related, yeah, something needs to be done abt the CF that is congress/senate/campaign finance.
    But put the horse first. Control monopolies and the other issues dissipate.
    Maybe.

  12. But my big wish is to have a test before you can vote.
    I can’t think of anyway to do that without it becoming a matter of race/class discrimination.
    Perhaps a better idea would be to require history and civics tests to anyone running for office. Any score below, say, a C+ (or numerical equivalent) would disqualify a candidate.
    But there’s probably no fair way to implement any of these ideas.
    .

  13. Michael says:

    The proposed 28th amendment–ERA–would’ve been nice.

  14. pansypoo says:

    the ERA woulda been nice.
    and i agree with spork. which goes to INTENSIVE civics classes. not just a flag + the pledge.

  15. The Other Sarah says:

    1. The ERA.
    2. End corporate personhood.
    3. Take decisions over investigating the crimes of the Bush administration out of Obama’s hands. We have evidence of war crimes. Torture of POWs. Fuckin’ A we need to prosecute these shitheads.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: