News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

How would you amend the U.S. constitution?

Started by jimmy olsen, November 05, 2012, 01:47:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zanza

Quote from: Barrister on November 05, 2012, 02:46:13 PM
Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 05, 2012, 02:39:56 PM
You need to return to your roots.  The great experiment has failed.  Become a Parliamentary democracy.

We have no monarchy to act as a figurehead and Germany's parliamentary republic looks stupid.  Going to have to stay a presidential republic.

:huh:

Plenty of places have a ceremonial President and a functioning parliamentary democracy.  Ireland and Israel come to mind.
To be fair our president doesn't really have much of a point. Why not just set up a parliamentary democracy without a ceremonial president. Switzerland seems to do fine without a head of state.

garbon

Quote from: Zanza on November 05, 2012, 03:00:08 PM
Add "To do whatever needs to be done in a 21st century state that the founders didn't think about in the 18th century" to Article 1, Section 8.

That sounds dreadfully vague.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Viking

Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 05, 2012, 02:39:56 PM
You need to return to your roots.  The great experiment has failed.  Become a Parliamentary democracy.

We have no monarchy to act as a figurehead and Germany's parliamentary republic looks stupid.  Going to have to stay a presidential republic.

Look to Finland or Iceland for model Republics. Both have elected Presidents with substantial powers who for the most part choose not to use them acting more like model 19th century enlightened monarchs with the same attitude and powers while having the country run by a parliament interfering from time to time when it is relevant.

I like to think that is the kind of presidency George Washington had allowing Alexander Hamilton to get on with running the country while he opened libraries and hospitals and generally oversaw what was going on.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Zanza

Quote from: garbon on November 05, 2012, 03:05:59 PM
Quote from: Zanza on November 05, 2012, 03:00:08 PM
Add "To do whatever needs to be done in a 21st century state that the founders didn't think about in the 18th century" to Article 1, Section 8.

That sounds dreadfully vague.
Well yes, it was meant to be vague. I wanted to express that the enumerated powers might need some update to allow for stuff like "To regulate healthcare" or "To regulate environmental protection". The catch-all clauses of "general welfare" or "interstate commerce" seem to be very vague to me and seem to cause a lot of conflicts about what the federal government may and may not legislate. So it would be good to define which issues really are for the federal government to decide upon and which aren't. That would perhaps go to increase the perceived legitimacy of the federal government too.

garbon

"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Razgovory

Quote from: Barrister on November 05, 2012, 02:46:13 PM
Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on November 05, 2012, 02:39:56 PM
You need to return to your roots.  The great experiment has failed.  Become a Parliamentary democracy.

We have no monarchy to act as a figurehead and Germany's parliamentary republic looks stupid.  Going to have to stay a presidential republic.

:huh:

Plenty of places have a ceremonial President and a functioning parliamentary democracy.  Ireland and Israel come to mind.

I'm not sure Israel is the best example.  Didn't their President rape someone a few years back?
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

MadImmortalMan

Quote from: Zanza on November 05, 2012, 03:16:04 PM
Well yes, it was meant to be vague. I wanted to express that the enumerated powers might need some update to allow for stuff like "To regulate healthcare" or "To regulate environmental protection". The catch-all clauses of "general welfare" or "interstate commerce" seem to be very vague to me and seem to cause a lot of conflicts about what the federal government may and may not legislate. So it would be good to define which issues really are for the federal government to decide upon and which aren't. That would perhaps go to increase the perceived legitimacy of the federal government too.

That's a good idea. I'd rather do it with an amendment on each thing. "Congress shall create Medicare", etc.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Zanza

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 05, 2012, 03:26:51 PMThat's a good idea. I'd rather do it with an amendment on each thing. "Congress shall create Medicare", etc.
It should still be a constitution, so only give the general outlines. Saying that Congress has the power to regulate healthcare or social security is okay. Having specific programs in the constitution would in my opinion limit Congress too much in what it can and can not do. And it's not like Congress actually has to use its powers, so even if healthcare was an enumerated power, if there are enough tea party voters, Congress theoretically could just abolish all regulations. If you write "Medicare" into the constitution, you take away that freedom.

CountDeMoney

Quote from: garbon on November 05, 2012, 03:01:41 PM
Quote from: Viking on November 05, 2012, 10:53:21 AM
Disagree, Clinton and Carter have been good Ex-Presidents

:lol: :bleeding:

Now you've got a problem with getting houses built for low income types, too?

Man, you are working straight from the Central Casting script today.

garbon

Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 05, 2012, 04:11:34 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 05, 2012, 03:01:41 PM
Quote from: Viking on November 05, 2012, 10:53:21 AM
Disagree, Clinton and Carter have been good Ex-Presidents

:lol: :bleeding:

Now you've got a problem with getting houses built for low income types, too?

Man, you are working straight from the Central Casting script today.

If only he kept his efforts restricted to building homes.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Valmy

What did Jimmy do again?  I don't really recall...I know he says mean things about Israel.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 04:14:50 PM
What did Jimmy do again?  I don't really recall...I know he says mean things about Israel.

He still breathes.  Conservatives seem to have a real problem with that.

MadImmortalMan

Quote from: Zanza on November 05, 2012, 03:32:41 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 05, 2012, 03:26:51 PMThat's a good idea. I'd rather do it with an amendment on each thing. "Congress shall create Medicare", etc.
It should still be a constitution, so only give the general outlines. Saying that Congress has the power to regulate healthcare or social security is okay. Having specific programs in the constitution would in my opinion limit Congress too much in what it can and can not do. And it's not like Congress actually has to use its powers, so even if healthcare was an enumerated power, if there are enough tea party voters, Congress theoretically could just abolish all regulations. If you write "Medicare" into the constitution, you take away that freedom.

What if I want to protect Medicare from that theoretical Tea Party Congress?
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Barrister

Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 04:14:50 PM
What did Jimmy do again?  I don't really recall...I know he says mean things about Israel.

Lots and lots of mean things about Israel.  "Apartheid" is one of them.

On the contrary he says nice things about Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez.  And despite the usual custom of former Presidents not criticizing their successors, Carter went out of his way to criticize Bush 43.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

Neil

Quote from: CountDeMoney on November 05, 2012, 04:15:50 PM
Quote from: Valmy on November 05, 2012, 04:14:50 PM
What did Jimmy do again?  I don't really recall...I know he says mean things about Israel.

He still breathes.  Conservatives seem to have a real problem with that.
Man, Seedy the bailbondsman would not have been impressed by your love for Israel-bashing and Castropologism.  You've changed, man.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.