Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-23-2011, 10:58 PM
 
Location: Earth
1,529 posts, read 1,726,450 times
Reputation: 1877

Advertisements

I've been giving this topic a lot of thought lately and I'm interested in seeing what others thing about this. What would you change.

There are a number of things I would change: End the electoral college, increase the terms for house members, place restrictions on the second amendment and clarify the first. Since I don't want to go against my original question, there is one part I would change completely:

Article 1, section 3.

I would completely change the Senate. Why? you might ask. Very simple; It is not fair that a state such as California, with 35 million people has the same amount of Senators as Wyoming, a state with 500,000 people.

I have two solutions:

1. The simple solution. Simply take the population of the United States, divide by a 100 and try to create larger districts for Senators to represent. State governments do it, why can't the fed?

2. The slightly more complicated solution. I kind of stole this idea from a number of countries that have a parliamentary system. Keep the House of representatives the way it is, but when we vote, we vote twice; once for the candidate and once for the party.

The specific candidate that you choose would get elected to the House, like it's always been. But, you vote a second time, not for a specific Representative in the Senate, but for the party of your choice. Then, after seeing the percentages (ie 48% Dem 48% GOP 2% Libertarian 1% Green 1% Free OJ Party), the party itself will select the appropriate candidates.

What this will do is allow for people who may like a candidate but hate their party, have their cake and eat it too. Also, it could open the door for more parties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:05 PM
 
Location: Republic of Texas
988 posts, read 1,203,460 times
Reputation: 707
I would add a balanced budget requirement.

Outlaw personal income taxes.

Outlaw any restriction on domestic mineral extraction.

Outlaw commies, hippies, Sean Penn, lattes, emo music, and bicycle paths.

Outlaw flag burning.

Outlaw outlaws.

Outlaw baby killing, and yet provide for televised public executions of overwhelmingly convicted murderers withiin 24 hours of the verdict.

I know that's not ONE thing, but it could probably be rolled into a single amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:24 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,209,520 times
Reputation: 35013
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric3781 View Post
I would add a balanced budget requirement.

Outlaw personal income taxes.

Outlaw any restriction on domestic mineral extraction.

Outlaw commies, hippies, Sean Penn, lattes, emo music, and bicycle paths.

Outlaw flag burning.

Outlaw outlaws.

Outlaw baby killing, and yet provide for televised public executions of overwhelmingly convicted murderers withiin 24 hours of the verdict.

I know that's not ONE thing, but it could probably be rolled into a single amendment.
No comment on the stupidity of your post, but would you really watch someone being executed for entertainment?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:24 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,319,728 times
Reputation: 2337
Repeal the 14th Amendment granting personhood to corporations and incorporating individuals.

That's just too futuristic for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:30 PM
 
Location: Republic of Texas
988 posts, read 1,203,460 times
Reputation: 707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
No comment on the stupidity of your post, but would you really watch someone being executed for entertainment?
I am totally serious.

But I forgot to add that after they are publicly executed, preferably by electrocution, on television, we hang their corpse from a lamp post in town square for two weeks with a banner displaying their crimes and victims names.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:31 PM
 
995 posts, read 1,115,623 times
Reputation: 1148
Term limits for every office. No exceptions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:34 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,209,520 times
Reputation: 35013
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric3781 View Post
I am totally serious.

But I forgot to add that after they are publicly executed, preferably by electrocution, on television, we hang their corpse from a lamp post in town square for two weeks with a banner displaying their crimes and victims names.
I didn't ask if you were serious, I asked if you would watch that for entertainment. I like to know who the deranged are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:37 PM
 
1,457 posts, read 2,027,912 times
Reputation: 1407
I would take away the governments ability to change it!! Its our Constitution, not theirs, those jackars's just think it belongs to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2011, 11:39 PM
 
Location: Republic of Texas
988 posts, read 1,203,460 times
Reputation: 707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
I didn't ask if you were serious, I asked if you would watch that for entertainment. I like to know who the deranged are.
I really don't care what you asked.

People watch similarly deranged things on reality TV every night in America. What's wrong with some visceral and compelling justice being exacted on prime time TV?

It would probably still lose out to a bunch of greasy meatbags from NJ getting sloshed and beating the crap out of each other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2011, 12:01 AM
 
553 posts, read 1,026,776 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric3781 View Post
I would add a balanced budget requirement.

Outlaw personal income taxes.

Outlaw any restriction on domestic mineral extraction.

Outlaw commies, hippies, Sean Penn, lattes, emo music, and bicycle paths.

Outlaw flag burning.

Outlaw outlaws.

Outlaw baby killing, and yet provide for televised public executions of overwhelmingly convicted murderers withiin 24 hours of the verdict.

I know that's not ONE thing, but it could probably be rolled into a single amendment.
I would outlaw idiots. They are the cause of all troubles.
But that has nothing to do with the CONSTITUTION, although, you seem to have no idea what the constitution is about anyways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top