Link of the Day: The Three Awesomest Constitutional Amendments Ever Proposed

Posted on January 5, 2013 6:00 pm

[High Praise! to Nuking Politics]

Proposed Constitutional Amendments

The first one absolutely gives me goosebumps of giddy delight.

[Think you have a link that's IMAO-worthy? Send it to harvolson@gmail.com. If I use your link, you will receive High Praise! (assuming you remember to put your name in the email)]

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (4 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

11 Responses to “Link of the Day: The Three Awesomest Constitutional Amendments Ever Proposed”

  1. FredKey says:

    Well thought-out; no immediate loopholes occur to me–beyond Congress’s tendency to pass a lot of rules that claim they have done their duty when they have not.

    I can see them trying out an “as if passed” rule that would automatically renew all taxes on the opening session of Congress without a vote. If they can fillibuster without fillibustering, why not vote without voting? No political fallout, no messy work, and the tax rate never becomes zero.

  2. Steel Turman says:

    Elevates the law to an art form expressing logic and common sense.

    Better stated than some of the other amendments.

    Good thinking right there.

    Elegantly simple, which precludes any possibility of being considered, much less enacted.

    Sad, that.

  3. CTCompromise says:

    Oh Man!! You can not be serious. Any one of these ammendments-let alone all three- would require that members of the U.S. Senate AND House of “Representatives” show up in Congress like, WAY more than they do now. How are they ever going to attend enough golf tournaments, fund raising events, celebrity hosted parties and union rallies to ensure their re-election? Let alone being able to squeeze in a few “fact finding missions” in warm tropical climatesevery few weeks, if we insist they add more “In Washington” time to their schedule ?

  4. Keln says:

    CTC:

    That is why in my response to Hunter’s post, I narrowed it down to a single amendment that simply prohibits the federal government from taxing the people.

  5. 4of7 says:

    If 10 percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam!
    How’s this: if you live in town, you pay 10% of what you make to the city.
    If you live outside the city limits, you pay 10% to the county.
    All the cities and counties in each state pay 10% of what they collect to the state government.
    All 50 states pay 10% of what they collect from the cities and counties to the federal government.
    With our nation producing about 16 trillion dollars in wealth each year (slightly less than our current deficit) that means the cities and counties get a total of 1.6 trillion to spend, and We The People keep 15.4 trillion.
    The cities and counties keep 1.54 trillion and send 160 billion to the states.
    The states keep 154 billion and send 16 billion to the federal government.
    Too generous?

  6. Vaktatunnen says:

    I’d really like an amendment that ensures that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, don’t ya know. I mean, when an amendment goes into the Constitution, it becomes the law of the land, right? Yeah, that would be a good one. Seems rational.

  7. Iowa Jim says:

    I’d add one that, in all civil cases, the plaintiff’s attorney shall be personally responsible for an amount equal to the difference between the damages
    sought and the damages granted. Also one that directs that there shall be a one in a thousand random chance that one of the attorneys involved in any case
    shall be executed in public at the end of the case.

  8. Idahoser says:

    I. why only tax laws?

    I like this one: No law shall be applicable to one person any differently than to any other person. No exceptions.
    (this automatically makes all taxes “fair”, because you can only have one rate. And no longer will politicians be immune to their own laws. Regardless of your age or financial status, if you want to raise my taxes, you have to raise your own too.)

    Attempting to convince others to change the Constitution is protected by the First Amendment. Attempting to circumvent Constitutional protections is treason.

  9. jw says:

    my proposed amendments:

    1) english shall be the official language of the united states. all official business shall be done in english and if a translator is needed the burden falls on the non-english speaker

    2) money is property and may not be taken from one person to give to another (see takings clause of the 5th amendment).

    3) to be in the united states illegally is a crime. the illegal has no rights except to be treated humanely while awaiting deportation.

  10. Hunter says:

    JW, I especially like your #2 – money is property and may not be taken from one person to give to another (see takings clause of the 5th amendment). I believe the early Congresses functioned that way, if I remember some of the arguments correctly.

  11. stloucat says:

    I have said much the same as the first one for years; I figure one of the primary benefits would be that they would spend so much time ‘maintaining’ and arguing over existing taxes, they could not fnd the time to enact new laws/taxes.

    also, where is the one about not being allowed to pass any law that does not apply equally and fully to them as well?????

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>