Essay:Needed Constitutional Amendments (Stabby the Misanthrope)
|
This essay is an original work by Stabby the Misanthrope. It does not necessarily reflect the views expressed in RationalWiki's Mission Statement, but we welcome discussion of a broad range of ideas. Unless otherwise stated, this is original content, released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 or any later version. See RationalWiki:Copyrights. Feel free to make comments on the talk page, which will probably be far more interesting, and might reflect a broader range of RationalWiki editors' thoughts. |
At the time it was written, the US Constitution was one of the most progressive and forward-looking documents ever written. For its time. But today we live in a society fundamentally different from the society the Founding Fathers lived in, and the Constitution as it is does not address many contemporary concerns.
The Founding Fathers knew the Constitution could not last the ages unchanged, and no less than Thomas Jefferson proposed a Constitutional Convention every twenty years to update the venerable document and ultimate law of the nation. It is time we took Jefferson up on that proposal. To that purpose, I propose the following amendments to the Constitution, to update it for today's society, and, hopefully, guide us into tomorrow's society.
Equal Rights[edit]
Proposed text:
Men and women, and those of indeterminate or unnamed gender, shall be considered as equals under any law passed by the Congress, or any of the Nation's constituent states or local jurisdictions, including unincorporated territories. All descriptions of Personhood, as used in this Constitution, shall be considered to include all genders and sexes.
Commentary: That last bit just states the whenever the Constitution uses the word "he", "him", or "his", it really means "everybody".
Freedom of Lifestyle[edit]
Proposed text:
Congress nor the States shall pass no abridgments of lifestyle choices, except in the most dire of emergencies, and for no longer than a decade, should such choices place no undue burden on Society.
Commentary: The intent of this amendment is to protect not only personal choices, such as abortion, but also economic choices. The "most dire of emergencies" provides for war rationing and other necessary restrictions of economic choice, as practiced during World War II. A clause mandating the impermanence of such restrictions, for only ten years, prevents Congress or the President from making any such emergency abridgements permanent.
The "undue burden" clause is flexible, and could be used to be used to restrict economic or even personal practices, such as acts that endanger the health of others. As with any clause in the Constitution, it is subject to abuse for political or religious purposes (i.e. banning homosexuality, even though this amendment is intended to protect that).
Right to Privacy[edit]
Proposed text:
No person shall, against his will, have knowledge of his lifestyle choices be systematically collected or distributed in any way without their express consent, or without due process of law
Commentary: "Due process of law" is necessary, otherwise it would be illegal for a police force to collect information about anyone in the investigation of any case.
Annulment of the Electoral College and Establishment of Instant Runoff Voting[edit]
Proposed text:
The President and Vice President shall be chosen by the people through direct election without the intercession of Electors. The official certified results of the several States shall be confirmed and certified by a joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives.
Ballots shall provide a method for Citizens to rank Their choices. Should no one Candidate win a majority of votes, the Candidate with the least number of votes shall be disqualified and his voters' ballots Recounted using their Next named choice. This Process shall continue until a Candidate receives a majority.
Commentary:
Clarification of Second Amendment[edit]
Proposed text:
Firearms, with the exception of those licensed for sport, may only be held by state agencies.
Annulment of Corporate Personhood[edit]
Provision for Forced Removal from the Office of President[edit]
Proposed text:
Should the President utterly fail his duty to protect and serve his country, or should he demonstrate willful and repeated gross incompetence, a Vote of no Confidence may be initiated by a three-fifths vote in the House of Representatives, a two-thirds vote in the Supreme Court, or petition by three-fifths of the States. Removal from Office shall occur only after the Vote of no Confidence is approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the People.
Commentary:
- What exactly does "a two-thirds majority vote of the People" mean? A majority of 2/3 of the vote? A majority representing 2/3 of eligible voters? A majority representing 2/3 of the population of voting age (e.g. incl. disenfranchised voters)? ScepticWombat (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)