| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Poll: Is it time to pass a 28th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution? |
| 2009-12-07 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #14 Lets make the following change to the fifth amendment, change the text from: ... without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. to: ... without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2009-12-07 22:19 |
| #13 I have some hope for my pain-leading-to-change paradigm. Perceived pain is what got us the Congress and Administration we're presently saddled with so I'd say your paradigm is perfectly workable with the obvious caveats. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2009-12-07 20:14 |
| #12 the EPA's recent decision on CO2 regulation; that would be political suicide for many politicians but since a regulatory agency did it there's no one to blame Congress is still to blame for CO2 regulation. I guess only after the electorate feels a sufficient amount of pain & bestirs itself to think a little bit (as opposed to emote) about environmental regulation, will that situation change. I have some hope for my pain-leading-to-change paradigm. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2009-12-07 15:54 |
| #11 Repeal of the 16th and 17th amendments would be a good start. |
| Posted by: Spats Omalet7638 2009-12-07 15:52 |
| #10 How about an amendment putting a time limit (aka sunset law) on all legislation so that no bill can have effect after 5 years without a re-authorization. I like the idea but as a result we'd get one omnibus bill every session reauthorizing everything in one fell swoop. The political horse-trading would be such that it would pretty much guarantee business-as-usual in DC. And if it didn't Congress could merely slough off the more difficult / politically dangerous things to regulatory agencies just as they do now. See e.g., the EPA's recent decision on CO2 regulation; that would be political suicide for many politicians but since a regulatory agency did it there's no one to blame. And anyone voting to dissolve the EPA would be run out of town on a rail as someone who hates children & the poor (who are always, of course, the victims). A couple of conceptual ideas I've always liked are: 1) a complete small-business exemption from federal laws & regulations; and 2) a consumer opt-out provision allowing a separate class of goods & services to be offered free of regulatory & legal perils, just allow the businesses and consumers to make their own informed decisions and offer these goods & services alongside the government-approved variety. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2009-12-07 15:37 |
| #9 Add to that Garth that you have to get off your fat ass every 4 years and go down (in person - unless you are physically unable to do so) and re-register to vote - with positive, photo, proof of citizenship. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-12-07 14:36 |
| #8 How about an amendment putting a time limit (aka sunset law) on all legislation so that no bill can have effect after 5 years without a re-authorization. Also, if an exception needs to be made then the exception must be voted on separately and pass by 2/3. We could also tack on something to sunset all existing legislation too. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2009-12-07 14:22 |
| #7 Poll tax! Poll Tax! Racist! Er, Taxist! Err... whatever |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2009-12-07 13:24 |
| #6 how about an amendment that you only get to vote if you've paid income taxes in the year before the vote |
| Posted by: lord garth 2009-12-07 13:14 |
| #5 Precisely the problem P2K though I do favor something of the sort despite the massive potential for abuse. Conceptually the problem is, of course, the runaway cost and scope of the federal government comprising its nearly unchecked ability to spend, borrow, tax & regulate. Rjschwarz is hitting the same idea from a different and narrower angle as are most from the political center to the right that I've seen calling for some sort of new Constitutional Amendment. Whatever form it takes and however it's done it's far past time for a new Amendment slashing the size, cost & reach of the federal government and restoring the competition among states and localities as to what sort of tax & regulatory policies are most effective. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2009-12-07 13:14 |
| #4 I do like that amendment they wrote up though. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2009-12-07 12:47 |
| #3 If you are gonna have a new Amendment make it a balanced Budget Amendment. (1) Include in that amendment a sunset clause that all laws must be reevaluated and revoted into law on a set basis to clear out old, stupid, non-functioning laws and to keep Congress too busy to pass a lot of new stupid, non-functioning laws. (2) Also include in that amendment something preventing riders and other pork that is habitually attached to otherwise well meaning laws. If you can't get it passed on the laws own merits it doesn't belong as a Federal Law. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2009-12-07 12:46 |
| #2 ...and you better put in that any recalculation of the formula or method of data collection has a built in 4 year wait period between the change implementation and its effect on the collection level of any derived taxes. Otherwise, they'll cook the books every year. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-12-07 12:32 |
| #1 Nice idea but it's poorly thought out. As presented it would be utilized, by a Congress & an Administration such as those we have now, to complete the transition to socialism. If, indeed, we're not there already. E.g., want to collapse the badly damaged remnants of the private sector? Just note the new Constitutional mandate that every citizen be afforded the same gold-plated health care & retirement packages we bestow upon members of Congress. A much better idea, though one not fully formed, would be to prohibit the cumulative cost of government (to include all direct & indirect taxation, cost of regulatory compliance, lost productivity due to regulation, etc.) at all levels (federal, state & local) from exceeding a predetermined threshold; say 10% of the exclusively private sector GDP. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2009-12-07 12:04 |