What would you change?

[Byte Stryke]

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States to at least one Lawful Citizen of the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[Jumpstart]

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States to at least one Lawful Citizen of the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This was intended for slaves in the 19th century, not illegal aliens in the 21st century. Hence the bastardization.

[Byte Stryke]

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States to at least one Lawful Citizen of the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any CITIZEN or LEGAL RESIDENT within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

sorry, forgot one.

[josh7328]

Strengthen the second ammendment, set term limits on all offices, taxes would be an equal percentage of income for all citizens. Also agree with previous statements on immigrant baby citizenship.

[Marlin]

I'm with you Marlin, the electoral college allows each state to have a voice in the Presidential election. Without the electoral college the president would be elected by CA, NY, IL, and a couple of other highly populated states. CO, WY, NM, NV, MO, SD, ND, MN, ID and a few others might as well stay home.

I say no to term limits, the people must be allowed to vote for who they want. I know that this allows dirtbags to be in office for decades but the people make that decision and we can't deny the people their choice
.
I tend to agree with this. But, think how much nicer the world would have been if Robert Byrd would have had to disappear to the backwoods of W.V. 60 years sooner.

I would abolish the IRS (16th). I would institute a flat tax on everyone who makes $10K or more, this would give a huge incentive for people to educate themselves and earn more money. This would also make almost all income earners pay for the government services they receive instead of the system now where roughly 50% pay for government services and the other 50% skate.

Instead of the flat tax, National Sales Tax. That way Nobody escapes it. Oh, and throw in the provision that it can't be raised unless 2/3 of the states agree.

I would modify the wording in the 14th to disallow the illegals that the 14th has been twisted into helping.

This one could go away completely. The people it was intended for, are long since dead.

[Scanker19]

I'm with you Marlin, the electoral college allows each state to have a voice in the Presidential election. Without the electoral college the president would be elected by CA, NY, IL, and a couple of other highly populated states. CO, WY, NM, NV, MO, SD, ND, MN, ID and a few others might as well stay home.

I say no to term limits, the people must be allowed to vote for who they want. I know that this allows dirtbags to be in office for decades but the people make that decision and we can't deny the people their choice.

I would abolish the IRS (16th). I would institute a flat tax on everyone who makes $10K or more, this would give a huge incentive for people to educate themselves and earn more money. This would also make almost all income earners pay for the government services they receive instead of the system now where roughly 50% pay for government services and the other 50% skate.

I would modify the wording in the 14th to disallow the illegals that the 14th has been twisted into helping.

But the number of Electoral votes are still based on how many Senators (2) and how many congressmen they have. So CA who has 55 still has more "say" than NM who has 5. Now I'm not sure who has it, but some states have a loyalty clause or whatever you call it, where the electoral vote has to match the popular vote.

[mitch]

1) "A well armed populace is necessary for the liberty and security of a free people. The right of our citizens to keep and bear arms and munitions can not be limited or infringed."

2) corruption and/or violation of civil rights is a positive defense to the charge of murder of politicians, judges, and police.

3) Citizenship lasts only between voting cycles. No vote this time = no rights until you vote.

4) Congressmen would not be allowed to vote on any bill which benefits their populace directly. No more pork.

5) We would take a census more often, and base electoral college counts from the most recent data.

6) One isn't a citizen until they complete High School or an equivalent, and you get a vote per degree. A PhD (or O rank) gets 3, Masters (or E rank, or discharge) get 2, BS and below gets 1. Only regionally accredited schools count, and only from US based institutions (no University of Bejing).

7) Balanced Budget amendment.

8) All laws must be re-affirmed every 25 years. (What my parents thought was a good and just law might be total bullshit today)

9) Limit spending on government programs to 50% gross revenue, and abolish unfunded mandates.

eliminating the current voting system and abolishing the electoral college- basically to win an election you have to have all the states tally up the votes and whoever got the most won.

We aren't a democracy - and I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a country where 3 of my 5 neighbors could decide to take my land & kill my children and it would be law. I would hope no one on here really wants mob rule. If so, understand that the majority of the people in the US are Liberal - you wouldn't get the country you think you would. Al Gore would have been president in 2001, and we would have lost our firearms after Reagan was shot.


Oh - one law:

1) 10000% manufacturer tax on Ammonium Nitrate phased in over 20 years. I'm sick of having corn in every damn thing in the world.

----

So, to summarize my changes I guess one could say that being born in the USA should not grant the proverbial silver spoon. If you want the rights of a citizenship in the USA then there is a minimum duty to perform. Educate yourself, vote, and be involved.

[mcantar18c]

What would I change?
I would change the phrase "shall not be infringed" to "shall not be infringed upon by anybody, to include the highest office of government," write it in bold and all caps, and add it to the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and especially the 9th and 10th. The amendments themselves are fine as they are (there are some I wouldn't mind doing away with, but I see no real need to), all that's needed is a reinforcement of "shall not be infringed." The only thing that should really be altered is change the 27th to requiring instead of preventing.
That should do it.


Oh, and repeal the 19th



Brownie points if you can understand this without looking up the amendments.

[Marlin]

But the number of Electoral votes are still based on how many Senators (2) and how many congressmen they have. So CA who has 55 still has more "say" than NM who has 5. Now I'm not sure who has it, but some states have a loyalty clause or whatever you call it, where the electoral vote has to match the popular vote.

True, but if more of the "smaller" states are voting for candidate "A" Who is a little more "qualified" than "B" Then "A" still has a shot over the more popular one that is completely pandering to the high population states.

[Scanker19]

What would I change?
I would change the phrase "shall not be infringed" to "shall not be infringed upon by anybody, to include the highest office of government," write it in bold and all caps, and add it to the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and especially the 9th and 10th. The amendments themselves are fine as they are (there are some I wouldn't mind doing away with, but I see no real need to), all that's needed is a reinforcement of "shall not be infringed." The only thing that should really be altered is change the 27th to requiring instead of preventing.
That should do it.


Oh, and repeal the 19th



Brownie points if you can understand this without looking up the amendments.

Someone likes Quartering Troops.