It is well past time for the States to reign in the rampant mismanagement by the federal government and reassert the rights of the sovereign States. The current United States federal government is to our generation what King George III was to our Founders’ generation; we must live up to our heritage and we owe it to our posterity to correct previous, ill conceived changes to our Constitution and reestablish the Liberties for which our Founders sacrificed so much.
To that end, I propose that the various States call for a Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution of the United States as outlined in my initial post. I fully recognize that what I have proposed is not perfect and look forward to thoughtful contributions from other concerned citizens; we must remember, though, that even the Founders did not create what they considered a “perfect” document, but rather the best Constitution that the original 13 States would accept.
I also recognize that I may be tilting at wind-mills, but can no longer simply yell at the nightly news and cry in my beer. It is time to quit the whining and moaning and take whatever steps are within my power to generate action to correct mistakes made by past generations. Those mistakes still bind my generation and will bind generations to come, unless we act to correct the infringement of our Liberty.
The following proposal is a work in progress and it requires further informed and considered input. It is imperative that the wording be clear and accurate to ensure that there is no inappropriate interpretation leading to unintended consequences. To date, these are largely my own thoughts, although tempered by various discussions with other concerned citizens.
Additionally, I believe that in this situation the amendment process must be driven from a local level through the various State legislatures, thereby forcing the federal government to comply and reasserting the sovereignty of the individual States and the superiority of State government over the federal government in all domestic matters.
The current frustration over the federal government’s health care reform is really the result of an underlying frustration – the erosion of our Liberty. It is time to return the United States to a union of independent, sovereign States and I look forward to any thoughts those reading this post may have.
General Summary
Section 1 – addresses the 14th amendment statement that all persons born on US soil are by birthright citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.
Section 2 – addresses the 16th amendment and clarifies the method of taxation by the United States government.
Section 3 – addresses the 27th amendment, clarifying and restricting compensation to elected officials and employees of the United States government.
Section 4 – adds the “Line Item Veto” power to the powers of the presidency.
Section 5 – restricts the federal legislature from combining unrelated matters to bills; prohibits riders and earmarks and requires “one bill, one topic” legislation.
Section 6 – prohibits a federally elected official from seeking a different elected office while holding a federally elected office.
Section 7 – repeals the 17th amendment and returns the selection of Senators to the various State legislatures.
Section 8 – repeals the 22nd amendment and return to the States and to the People the Liberty to select the President for as many terms as they choose.
Section 9 – repeals the 23rd amendment and ceases to confer to the District of Columbia the same rights and privileges as held by the States.
Section 10 – repeals the 26th amendment and returns the age of suffrage to 21 years.
Proposed Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
To that end, I propose that the various States call for a Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution of the United States as outlined in my initial post. I fully recognize that what I have proposed is not perfect and look forward to thoughtful contributions from other concerned citizens; we must remember, though, that even the Founders did not create what they considered a “perfect” document, but rather the best Constitution that the original 13 States would accept.
I also recognize that I may be tilting at wind-mills, but can no longer simply yell at the nightly news and cry in my beer. It is time to quit the whining and moaning and take whatever steps are within my power to generate action to correct mistakes made by past generations. Those mistakes still bind my generation and will bind generations to come, unless we act to correct the infringement of our Liberty.
The following proposal is a work in progress and it requires further informed and considered input. It is imperative that the wording be clear and accurate to ensure that there is no inappropriate interpretation leading to unintended consequences. To date, these are largely my own thoughts, although tempered by various discussions with other concerned citizens.
Additionally, I believe that in this situation the amendment process must be driven from a local level through the various State legislatures, thereby forcing the federal government to comply and reasserting the sovereignty of the individual States and the superiority of State government over the federal government in all domestic matters.
The current frustration over the federal government’s health care reform is really the result of an underlying frustration – the erosion of our Liberty. It is time to return the United States to a union of independent, sovereign States and I look forward to any thoughts those reading this post may have.
General Summary
Section 1 – addresses the 14th amendment statement that all persons born on US soil are by birthright citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.
Section 2 – addresses the 16th amendment and clarifies the method of taxation by the United States government.
Section 3 – addresses the 27th amendment, clarifying and restricting compensation to elected officials and employees of the United States government.
Section 4 – adds the “Line Item Veto” power to the powers of the presidency.
Section 5 – restricts the federal legislature from combining unrelated matters to bills; prohibits riders and earmarks and requires “one bill, one topic” legislation.
Section 6 – prohibits a federally elected official from seeking a different elected office while holding a federally elected office.
Section 7 – repeals the 17th amendment and returns the selection of Senators to the various State legislatures.
Section 8 – repeals the 22nd amendment and return to the States and to the People the Liberty to select the President for as many terms as they choose.
Section 9 – repeals the 23rd amendment and ceases to confer to the District of Columbia the same rights and privileges as held by the States.
Section 10 – repeals the 26th amendment and returns the age of suffrage to 21 years.
Proposed Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Section 1. This section addresses only the first sentence of the fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States, section 1 and changes that sentence to read: “All persons born of citizens of the United States or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” All else in the fourteenth article of amendment remains the same.
Section 2. This section addresses the sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States; it clarifies and specifies the method for federal taxation of individuals, business, and all entities operating within the United States.
a. All individual, personal income from whatever source derived shall be taxed at an equal rate to be determined by Congress and signed into law by the President. There shall be a standard personal deduction for all individual, personal income equal to one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment; this calculated amount shall be deducted from individual personal income and shall be exempt from any federal taxation; the balance of the income shall be taxed at the rate determined by Congress.
b. All business or other entity income from whatever source derived shall be taxed at an equal rate to be determined by Congress and signed into law by the President. There shall be a standard deduction for all businesses and other entities equal to two and one half times the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment; this calculated amount shall be deducted from the business or other entity income and shall be exempt from any federal taxation; the balance shall be taxed at the rate determined by Congress.
c. Congress may choose to allow additional targeted personal deductions the total of which shall not exceed one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment, but the total allowed deduction from federal income taxation shall not exceed two times each one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
d. All other forms of federal taxation are prohibited.
a. All individual, personal income from whatever source derived shall be taxed at an equal rate to be determined by Congress and signed into law by the President. There shall be a standard personal deduction for all individual, personal income equal to one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment; this calculated amount shall be deducted from individual personal income and shall be exempt from any federal taxation; the balance of the income shall be taxed at the rate determined by Congress.
b. All business or other entity income from whatever source derived shall be taxed at an equal rate to be determined by Congress and signed into law by the President. There shall be a standard deduction for all businesses and other entities equal to two and one half times the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment; this calculated amount shall be deducted from the business or other entity income and shall be exempt from any federal taxation; the balance shall be taxed at the rate determined by Congress.
c. Congress may choose to allow additional targeted personal deductions the total of which shall not exceed one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment, but the total allowed deduction from federal income taxation shall not exceed two times each one quarter of the national median individual income, rounded up to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
d. All other forms of federal taxation are prohibited.
Section 3. The twenty seventh article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby expanded and clarified as follows:
a. Compensation of elected officials and federal employees shall be directly tied to the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment and no other form of compensation from any source shall be allowed to elected officials while holding public office. Existing assets of elected officials shall be placed in a blind trust prior to taking office and shall be held in the blind trust during the period of public office and for one year after leaving public office.
b. Compensation to elected, federal officials and all federal employees shall be strictly limited to compensation for service while holding office and no pension or other form of compensation shall be paid to elected, federal officials or federal employees after leaving office. However, all elected, federal officials and federal employees shall be eligible to participate in savings plans available to all citizens of the United States.
c. Compensation to the President shall be five times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
d. Compensation to Senators and Supreme Court Justices shall be four times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
e. Compensation to members of the House of Representatives shall be three times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
f. Compensation to federal employees shall be determined by Congress as a percentage of national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment, but in no case shall any federal employee receive compensation exceeding three times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
a. Compensation of elected officials and federal employees shall be directly tied to the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment and no other form of compensation from any source shall be allowed to elected officials while holding public office. Existing assets of elected officials shall be placed in a blind trust prior to taking office and shall be held in the blind trust during the period of public office and for one year after leaving public office.
b. Compensation to elected, federal officials and all federal employees shall be strictly limited to compensation for service while holding office and no pension or other form of compensation shall be paid to elected, federal officials or federal employees after leaving office. However, all elected, federal officials and federal employees shall be eligible to participate in savings plans available to all citizens of the United States.
c. Compensation to the President shall be five times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
d. Compensation to Senators and Supreme Court Justices shall be four times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
e. Compensation to members of the House of Representatives shall be three times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
f. Compensation to federal employees shall be determined by Congress as a percentage of national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment, but in no case shall any federal employee receive compensation exceeding three times the national median individual income, rounded down to the nearest five thousand dollar increment.
Section 4. The President shall have the right to strike any provisions of any bill prior to signing into law, but those provisions not stricken shall have full effect.
Section 5. All bills shall clearly and explicitly address only one topic; riders and earmarks are strictly prohibited and all bills shall be subject to public review as described below:
a. Prior to submitting any bill from committee to the floor for open debate, the bill and all associated reports must be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but the review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
b. After congressional debate closes and prior to the congressional vote, the final form of the bill shall again be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
c. After Congress has voted to pass a bill and before the bill is sent to the President for signature, the bill shall again be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but the review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
a. Prior to submitting any bill from committee to the floor for open debate, the bill and all associated reports must be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but the review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
b. After congressional debate closes and prior to the congressional vote, the final form of the bill shall again be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
c. After Congress has voted to pass a bill and before the bill is sent to the President for signature, the bill shall again be presented for public review; the period of review shall be determined by Congress, but the review period shall not be less than five normal business days.
Section 6. No person while holding federal elected, public office shall campaign for a different elected, public office.
Section 7. The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 8. The twenty second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 9. The twenty third article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 10. The twenty sixth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Rationale for the proposal
Section 1
Modification and clarification of the 14th amendment is necessary because citizenship in any one of the United States is precious and should be restricted to those who have a stake in both the State and the United States. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to correctly confer citizenship upon those who had previously been enslaved. The interpretation of the wording of this amendment has resulted in a situation that could not have reasonably been conceived by the writers of the 14th amendment: people who enter the United States illegally confer US citizenship upon their offspring as a result of breaking US law. That is inherently unfair to any immigrant who follows our law and takes the prescribed steps to become a legal US citizen.
In addition to the plain unfairness of the current interpretation, there are economic and national sovereignty concerns. The economic concerns are quite straightforward. The influx of citizens from illegal immigrants stresses an already excessive demand on national resources. Furthermore, if the family is caught and deported, when the child reaches the age of eighteen, as an adult the child will have the right to return to the United States, but will have no sense of what it means to be a citizen of the State of residence or of the United States.
From a national sovereignty perspective, given modern modes of transportation and the animosity towards the United States by some foreign groups, it is quite conceivable that someone with long term thinking and enmity towards the United States could give birth here in the United States, thereby conferring citizenship upon the child, and then take the child back to the home country to be raised with hatred toward the United States.
That child as an adult would then have free entry into the United States, but rather than having a stake in the country could easily harbor malicious intentions. This may sound farfetched, but please remember how things changed from September 10, 2001 to September 12, 2001 and the horror and outrage that the country felt resulting from the attacks.
Section 2
The 16th amendment must be corrected because the current method of taxation used by the federal government invites class warfare rather than pulling the country together and it allows our politicians to obfuscate true levels of taxation with complicated and conflicting tax rules. Adoption of this section of the proposed amendment will automatically force transparency in the tax code since everyone will be taxed by the same method and at the same rate for amounts over the deductions available to all taxpayers. Finally, we will all be able to clearly see exactly what our government takes from our labors.
The standard deduction equal to roughly ¼ of the national median individual income would result in some at the very lowest end of the economic spectrum paying no federal income tax. Based on household income, I am estimating median individual income at $50,000 which would result in a standard deduction of $12,500 with the remaining income subject to federal income taxation. This indicates that approximately 22% of the potential taxpaying population (PTP) would pay no federal income tax because their income is below the threshold ¼ of national median individual income. While I cannot say with certainty, it is very likely that a large percentage of those earning below $12,500 per year are comprised of teenagers with summer and/or part time positions. Those who are working to support themselves at this income level are essentially at the national poverty level and allowing them a federal tax free income provides them the basic ability to survive and, eventually (hopefully) move up the economic ladder and ultimately contribute to the United States.
The remaining 78% of the PTP would be treated exactly the same under this proposal and all in this group would have equal incentive to hold politicians accountable and keep taxes low. There would be a clear linkage between services provided and the level of taxation. At present many, if not most, services provided by the federal government are not legitimate functions of government, but are encouraged simply because so many of those who receive these services do not pay for them. While it is true that the 22% of the PTP who would not pay federal income tax under this proposal would receive federal services, the remaining 78% of the PTP would certainly represent a majority and, as a matter of self interest, would hold in check absurd services.
The purpose of the targeted personal deduction equal to a maximum of roughly ¼ of national median individual income is included for the Congress to encourage savings for retirement, savings for future healthcare needs, the purchase of healthcare insurance, etc. The exact wording in the section must be clear to avoid Congress simply expanding the standard deduction, thereby increasing the percentage of the PTP not paying federal income tax. The national benefit of these targeted deductions would include the introduction of market forces into the acquisition of healthcare insurance at any age and improving individual savings for retirement and healthcare as people reach retirement age or need additional healthcare coverage. The wording of this section must be sufficiently flexible to allow Congress to target a variety of matters, but also sufficiently restrictive to prevent abuse of the targeted deductions.
It is true that the calculation under this scheme may result in an increase to the tax paid at some income levels, depending upon the rate Congress chooses. However, that will be immediately clear to all and at every economic level. This will make it much easier for us to hold our elected officials accountable – something I believe they would gravely fear.
By eliminating all other forms of taxation, we would further force transparency and reduce costs in virtually every other facet of life, thereby offsetting a potential increase to the dollar amount of income tax.
As to those who believe that targeted taxation can work to the public good by taxing “sin” items, the only response can be that if the targeted “sin” to be taxed is really that bad it should be regulated or prohibited – at the State level. Then the citizens of each State would have a much greater opportunity to choose what items would be restricted and to what extent.
As to tax on businesses and other entities, it is necessary to separate these from personal income tax calculations and may be economically sound to ensure that foreign organizations are prevented from exploiting our tax code to our own detriment. Nonetheless, from a purely economic perspective and to truly revive the economy, I am a strong proponent of a zero percent tax on business, whether foreign or domestic. This will encourage domestic business to flourish and draw foreign firms to our shores, further increasing domestic output and increasing employment rolls.
Section 3
The 27th amendment must be expanded and clarified in order to stop the abuse to which our elected officials subject the taxpayer. This section would put elected officials and federal employees in the position of improving the economic situation of the country as a matter of self interest – their income is directly tied to the economic prosperity of the United States and they will not enjoy special privileges that most citizens do not enjoy.
Section 4
The current popular belief seems to be that the President runs the country; the truth is that it should be Congress that runs the country, but far too many members of Congress abrogate their responsibility and happily leave popular dissatisfaction focused on the President. Since this situation will not likely change, it only makes sense to give the President the line item veto.
Section 5
This section is intended to stop the practice of adding completely unrelated amendments to important bills thereby either sneaking the amendment through unnoticed or forcing elected officials to vote for a ridiculous amendment in order to pass truly important legislation. While earmarks may be a very small percentage of the overall federal spending, the practice is irresponsible; if an amendment is worthwhile enough to tack onto other legislation, it should be sound enough to stand on its own.
Section 6
The intent of this section is to stop the practice of politicians holding one office as back up while seeking a different elected office. An elected official should focus on the office currently held rather than use the office as a platform to a different office – this does a serious injustice to the constituents and this practice should be stopped.
Section 7
Repeal of the 17th amendment would put public emphasis back to the State legislature where it truly belongs. Since the election of Senators bypasses the various State legislatures, the State legislatures are weakened and the federal legislature is clearly strengthened.
Section 8
Repeal of the 22nd amendment is warranted because there is no valid reason to restrict terms of office since the all elected officials’ tenures can be limited at each end of term. The problem is ignorance on the part of the electorate, but this cannot be resolved by amendment or legislation. If the United States has a President, or citizens of the various States have outstanding elected federal officials, and the citizenry wishes to keep them in office indefinitely, it is the right of the people to continue to vote these officials into office. Term limits are a restriction to the Liberty of citizens to choose their Representatives, Senators (whether chosen State legislature or currently, popular vote), or President. Our founders foresaw the possibility of abuse, yet they chose not to limit terms as a Constitutional matter – they correctly understood that it is impossible to protect and defend Liberty by restricting Liberty.
Section 3 of this proposed article of amendment, which addresses the 27th amendment, would cease the abuse currently rampant by those who would make a career of their office. Citizens who accept the compensation as outlined in section 3 of this proposal would receive fair compensation for their service, but would not be able to overly enrich themselves at the expense of the citizens of the United States. Those who choose to make a career of their office under these terms would very likely be the type of elected official who truly seeks to serve their constituents, their State, and the United States.
Section 9
The 23rd amendment should be repealed simply because there is no valid reason for the District of Columbia to enjoy the same electoral weight as a state. Those residing in the district should certainly have their votes counted and they should be allowed to choose the state adjacent to the District of Columbia in which they want to vote.
Section 10
The 26th amendment was ratified because young men 18 years of age were conscripted into service to fight in Vietnam. The reasoning at the time was that since these young men were old enough to fight on behalf of the United States, they should have the right to vote. This reasoning, while valid at the time, is no longer the case since we now have an all volunteer military.
The founders chose the age of 21 for the right to vote in an era when people matured at a much younger age than they do today; quite a few people in their mid to late twenties still behave as if they are in high school. The 21 year age for voting will not necessarily ensure that those voting for the first time will have sufficient maturity to cast informed, well founded votes, but raising the age to 21 will give our youth 3 additional years to gain life experience before they participate in determining the future of the United States.
Rationale for the proposal
Section 1
Modification and clarification of the 14th amendment is necessary because citizenship in any one of the United States is precious and should be restricted to those who have a stake in both the State and the United States. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to correctly confer citizenship upon those who had previously been enslaved. The interpretation of the wording of this amendment has resulted in a situation that could not have reasonably been conceived by the writers of the 14th amendment: people who enter the United States illegally confer US citizenship upon their offspring as a result of breaking US law. That is inherently unfair to any immigrant who follows our law and takes the prescribed steps to become a legal US citizen.
In addition to the plain unfairness of the current interpretation, there are economic and national sovereignty concerns. The economic concerns are quite straightforward. The influx of citizens from illegal immigrants stresses an already excessive demand on national resources. Furthermore, if the family is caught and deported, when the child reaches the age of eighteen, as an adult the child will have the right to return to the United States, but will have no sense of what it means to be a citizen of the State of residence or of the United States.
From a national sovereignty perspective, given modern modes of transportation and the animosity towards the United States by some foreign groups, it is quite conceivable that someone with long term thinking and enmity towards the United States could give birth here in the United States, thereby conferring citizenship upon the child, and then take the child back to the home country to be raised with hatred toward the United States.
That child as an adult would then have free entry into the United States, but rather than having a stake in the country could easily harbor malicious intentions. This may sound farfetched, but please remember how things changed from September 10, 2001 to September 12, 2001 and the horror and outrage that the country felt resulting from the attacks.
Section 2
The 16th amendment must be corrected because the current method of taxation used by the federal government invites class warfare rather than pulling the country together and it allows our politicians to obfuscate true levels of taxation with complicated and conflicting tax rules. Adoption of this section of the proposed amendment will automatically force transparency in the tax code since everyone will be taxed by the same method and at the same rate for amounts over the deductions available to all taxpayers. Finally, we will all be able to clearly see exactly what our government takes from our labors.
The standard deduction equal to roughly ¼ of the national median individual income would result in some at the very lowest end of the economic spectrum paying no federal income tax. Based on household income, I am estimating median individual income at $50,000 which would result in a standard deduction of $12,500 with the remaining income subject to federal income taxation. This indicates that approximately 22% of the potential taxpaying population (PTP) would pay no federal income tax because their income is below the threshold ¼ of national median individual income. While I cannot say with certainty, it is very likely that a large percentage of those earning below $12,500 per year are comprised of teenagers with summer and/or part time positions. Those who are working to support themselves at this income level are essentially at the national poverty level and allowing them a federal tax free income provides them the basic ability to survive and, eventually (hopefully) move up the economic ladder and ultimately contribute to the United States.
The remaining 78% of the PTP would be treated exactly the same under this proposal and all in this group would have equal incentive to hold politicians accountable and keep taxes low. There would be a clear linkage between services provided and the level of taxation. At present many, if not most, services provided by the federal government are not legitimate functions of government, but are encouraged simply because so many of those who receive these services do not pay for them. While it is true that the 22% of the PTP who would not pay federal income tax under this proposal would receive federal services, the remaining 78% of the PTP would certainly represent a majority and, as a matter of self interest, would hold in check absurd services.
The purpose of the targeted personal deduction equal to a maximum of roughly ¼ of national median individual income is included for the Congress to encourage savings for retirement, savings for future healthcare needs, the purchase of healthcare insurance, etc. The exact wording in the section must be clear to avoid Congress simply expanding the standard deduction, thereby increasing the percentage of the PTP not paying federal income tax. The national benefit of these targeted deductions would include the introduction of market forces into the acquisition of healthcare insurance at any age and improving individual savings for retirement and healthcare as people reach retirement age or need additional healthcare coverage. The wording of this section must be sufficiently flexible to allow Congress to target a variety of matters, but also sufficiently restrictive to prevent abuse of the targeted deductions.
It is true that the calculation under this scheme may result in an increase to the tax paid at some income levels, depending upon the rate Congress chooses. However, that will be immediately clear to all and at every economic level. This will make it much easier for us to hold our elected officials accountable – something I believe they would gravely fear.
By eliminating all other forms of taxation, we would further force transparency and reduce costs in virtually every other facet of life, thereby offsetting a potential increase to the dollar amount of income tax.
As to those who believe that targeted taxation can work to the public good by taxing “sin” items, the only response can be that if the targeted “sin” to be taxed is really that bad it should be regulated or prohibited – at the State level. Then the citizens of each State would have a much greater opportunity to choose what items would be restricted and to what extent.
As to tax on businesses and other entities, it is necessary to separate these from personal income tax calculations and may be economically sound to ensure that foreign organizations are prevented from exploiting our tax code to our own detriment. Nonetheless, from a purely economic perspective and to truly revive the economy, I am a strong proponent of a zero percent tax on business, whether foreign or domestic. This will encourage domestic business to flourish and draw foreign firms to our shores, further increasing domestic output and increasing employment rolls.
Section 3
The 27th amendment must be expanded and clarified in order to stop the abuse to which our elected officials subject the taxpayer. This section would put elected officials and federal employees in the position of improving the economic situation of the country as a matter of self interest – their income is directly tied to the economic prosperity of the United States and they will not enjoy special privileges that most citizens do not enjoy.
Section 4
The current popular belief seems to be that the President runs the country; the truth is that it should be Congress that runs the country, but far too many members of Congress abrogate their responsibility and happily leave popular dissatisfaction focused on the President. Since this situation will not likely change, it only makes sense to give the President the line item veto.
Section 5
This section is intended to stop the practice of adding completely unrelated amendments to important bills thereby either sneaking the amendment through unnoticed or forcing elected officials to vote for a ridiculous amendment in order to pass truly important legislation. While earmarks may be a very small percentage of the overall federal spending, the practice is irresponsible; if an amendment is worthwhile enough to tack onto other legislation, it should be sound enough to stand on its own.
Section 6
The intent of this section is to stop the practice of politicians holding one office as back up while seeking a different elected office. An elected official should focus on the office currently held rather than use the office as a platform to a different office – this does a serious injustice to the constituents and this practice should be stopped.
Section 7
Repeal of the 17th amendment would put public emphasis back to the State legislature where it truly belongs. Since the election of Senators bypasses the various State legislatures, the State legislatures are weakened and the federal legislature is clearly strengthened.
Section 8
Repeal of the 22nd amendment is warranted because there is no valid reason to restrict terms of office since the all elected officials’ tenures can be limited at each end of term. The problem is ignorance on the part of the electorate, but this cannot be resolved by amendment or legislation. If the United States has a President, or citizens of the various States have outstanding elected federal officials, and the citizenry wishes to keep them in office indefinitely, it is the right of the people to continue to vote these officials into office. Term limits are a restriction to the Liberty of citizens to choose their Representatives, Senators (whether chosen State legislature or currently, popular vote), or President. Our founders foresaw the possibility of abuse, yet they chose not to limit terms as a Constitutional matter – they correctly understood that it is impossible to protect and defend Liberty by restricting Liberty.
Section 3 of this proposed article of amendment, which addresses the 27th amendment, would cease the abuse currently rampant by those who would make a career of their office. Citizens who accept the compensation as outlined in section 3 of this proposal would receive fair compensation for their service, but would not be able to overly enrich themselves at the expense of the citizens of the United States. Those who choose to make a career of their office under these terms would very likely be the type of elected official who truly seeks to serve their constituents, their State, and the United States.
Section 9
The 23rd amendment should be repealed simply because there is no valid reason for the District of Columbia to enjoy the same electoral weight as a state. Those residing in the district should certainly have their votes counted and they should be allowed to choose the state adjacent to the District of Columbia in which they want to vote.
Section 10
The 26th amendment was ratified because young men 18 years of age were conscripted into service to fight in Vietnam. The reasoning at the time was that since these young men were old enough to fight on behalf of the United States, they should have the right to vote. This reasoning, while valid at the time, is no longer the case since we now have an all volunteer military.
The founders chose the age of 21 for the right to vote in an era when people matured at a much younger age than they do today; quite a few people in their mid to late twenties still behave as if they are in high school. The 21 year age for voting will not necessarily ensure that those voting for the first time will have sufficient maturity to cast informed, well founded votes, but raising the age to 21 will give our youth 3 additional years to gain life experience before they participate in determining the future of the United States.
