English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

17 answers

The right to kill morons that drive too slow in the left lane.

2006-08-16 08:37:42 · answer #1 · answered by jeepfaust 3 · 2 1

Actually I would remove an amendment or maybe just clarify one portion. The Commerce Clause which in the early 1900's the Supreme Court ruled on, or more accurately they legislated on, and which now allows the Federal Government to enter into every aspect of the private citizens life. This clause was intended only to make sure that States were in a position to trade on an even basis, i.e. a state with ocean ports could not unreasonably keep a landlocked state from access to the trade associated with an ocean port. Unfortunately, the Sup.Ct. and Congress have now used it to regulate virtually every aspect of our society from education to subsidies for farmers to regulation of the transportation industry and much more. So I would suggest we clarify the Commerce Clause to show what it was originally intended for. Read up on it so that the next time someone tells you about a Fed. program you can explain why Fed programs that are not geared to National Defense or the minting of money, are in fact, unconstitutional. I would then take all those taxes we spend on these programs and give them back to the taxpayer.

2006-08-16 11:20:40 · answer #2 · answered by Blah Blah Blah 1 · 0 0

I would like to have English made the official national language, but I don't want a constitutional ammendment to do that.

People are way too eager to mess with the Constitution over social issues that federal or state laws can address.Ammending the Constitution is a very serious thing and the process should be respected, not trotted out every time some group is disgruntled over something.

2006-08-16 08:39:41 · answer #3 · answered by Maria 4 · 4 0

We do not need any more. Let's find some politicians and judges to enforce and protect the ones we have. Here's a stretch - why don't we insist on it. Never mind, I forgot......we (sheepole) only become involved when it specifically effects/affects us. Until then it's no big deal. We only have the illusion of being a "free society". Party affiliation matters not anymore (at least with the two main parties) they are all the same.

Back to the question - we do not need any more

2006-08-16 08:50:36 · answer #4 · answered by budntequilla 2 · 2 0

I would add an amendment to the Constitution strengthening the individual and relegating all other entities to taxpayer status.

All corporations, all religious groups would have to pay taxes and not be allowed to lobby. Corporation would NOT be a 'person' under the law, and religious groups would NOT be tax exempt.

2006-08-16 10:43:03 · answer #5 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0 1

Equal rights for DC and U.S. administrations: they should all have a vote in Congress at least the House and all of them be able to vote for Pres. If they want representation in the Senate then instead of saying states it should be all U.S. administrations, call it state, commonwealth, district or territory.

2006-08-19 19:51:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Term limits on Congressmen....2 terms in senate or 3 in house.

If not that a hard cap on amount one can spend on a campaign for any office.

2006-08-16 08:43:31 · answer #7 · answered by jpxc99 3 · 0 1

To outlaw the KORAN in the United States.

2006-08-16 08:43:25 · answer #8 · answered by Cherokee indian 4 · 0 1

The right for gays and lesibians to marry, adopt children and have the same rights we have as heterosexuals. Also, the right for a women to have complete control over her body.

2006-08-17 17:38:48 · answer #9 · answered by CxeLady 3 · 0 1

Congress shall pass no law without repealing two.

2006-08-16 14:21:31 · answer #10 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers