I admit that I have little to add that's positive, but please let me take a moment to hate on other people's ideas.
btilly wrote:If any part of a bill is found to be unconstitutional, the entire bill must be struck down. (To try to discourage people from slipping unconstitutional bits into important bills.)
Won't this just encourage legislators to slip unconstitutional bits into important bills to sabotage them?
I'd like to see clarification of Article 1, section 8, clause 8 to say that the limited times for copyright and patent law shall be bounded above by something reasonable. For instance 25 years. But that's really wishful thinking on my part since the real problem is in the laws passed by Congress. (And the court's unwillingness to enforce that clause.)
So, essentially just putting "for a limited time" in boldface? Can you do
that in those old-timey scripts?
BlackSails wrote:Amendment: Any elected member of the United States government, or any employee thereof who accepts any gift, reimbursement, renumeration or consideration shall be ineligible to hold any office.
Birthday parties are going to suck
Seriously, how is this going to work? Polite society involves the exchange of gifts and considerations. Your friend comes by to visit, and he sleeps on your couch- that's a consideration. A bunch of your friends are at a restaurant, and someone picks up the check, that's a gift. Hell, you're in another congressman's office, and he pulls out his whiskey and says, 'would you like a drink?'
The point is to hold our elected officials to a higher standard, not to handicap them.
Amendment: No person running for election can accept any gift, reimbursement, remuneration or consideration which is not anonymous. Congress shall create appropriate measures for ensuring anonymity.
I have to call this one out. This is the worst idea I've seen put up here. You don't discourage graft by making it harder
to conceal where money is coming from. Seriously.
Amendment: Members of the supreme court shall be appointed to 10 year terms. No justice can be appointed more than three times.
I understand your resentment of the court's dinosaurs, but making justices* worry about getting reappointed will dilute the independence of the court. Look at countries where high judges fear for their jobs (think Zimbabwe or Russia), and ask yourself if that's the direction we want to move in.
*the distinction is significant. Members or officers of the court include clerks, attorneys, bailiffs, and really anybody on staff.
Elvish Pillager wrote:Amendment: Upon taking office, any state or federal official shall immediately choose up to one million dollars worth of her or his property, and surrender the rest to the government. While in office, s/he shall also be barred from accepting gifts or payments totaling to a value greater than the stipend associated with the office.
Yeah, let's all punish the rich.
On a more technical note, anyone who wants to use a dollar amount in the constitution should remember the 7th amendment
Edit: On second thought, I will say something that's not a criticism (though not completely serious). The amendment I'd like to see is to go through and fix all those confusing commas. They're the source of half of our constitutional disputes.