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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.