This PurpleSlog post is the last entry in US Constitutional Amendment series.
This post: A Few More Ideas
My Concern/Caveat: The list of amendments comes from years of thinking and note taking. I have documented the source/inspiration of the idea when remember it or have it noted. Some of the ideas where mine and then combined with like proposals. I will add further documentation as I find or as it is brought to my attention.
—
Vice-Presidential Electoral Vote Process Amendment
What
In case of no majority electoral vote for the vice-president, The highest ranking in seniority supreme court justice (but not the Chief Justice) shall preside over the senate when it considers electing a VP as VP Selection Presiding Officer. The Senate may only elect up to but not including the day the term is to begin. If no VP is chosen by then, it falls to the selected president to appoint a VP under the normal rules covering a vacancy. The presiding supreme court justice shall have no vote in this matter however. In case of vacancy in the Supreme Court, the order of succession will follow seniority in the federal judiciary by supreme court members, then all remaining federal judges, then all state supreme court justices. Congress may pass legislation to further define and refine and flesh out this succession.
Why
Avoid a future Constitutional Crises
—
Presidential Electoral Vote Process Amendment
What
In case of no majority electoral vote for the presidency, the house may only up to but not including the day the term is to begin vote for selecting a president. If no prez is chosen by then, the default rules of the land for covering a vacancy in the president shall prevail and be followed. During this deliberation, for selection, the presiding officer of the house shall not be the speaker, but instead shall be the chief justice of supreme court. The presiding Supreme court chief justice shall have no vote in this matter however. In case of vacancy in the Supreme Court, the order of succession will follow seniority in the federal judiciary by supreme court members, then all remaining federal judges, then all state supreme court justices. Congress may pass legislation to further define and refine and flesh out this succession.
Why
Avoid a future Constitutional Crises
—
Commerce Clause Clarification Amendment
What
A definition of “commerce” as applied in the Commerce Clause, to include an actual transaction of some sort, or some other limitation to stop it being applied to any action government chooses to indulge in.
Why
Reduce federal government overreaching and strengthen federalism.
—
Flag Desecration Federalism Control Amendment
What
The Right of the States to ban desecration of the Flags of the several States or of the United States shall not be infringed
Why
Counter Lawfare and anti-Judiciary activity
—
Here are some other ideas worth considering
- Increase the size of the House (2x) but reduce the number of committee assignments. This would best be done in conjunction with the other house/Senate amendments are proposed.
- Consider letting the States decide the manner in which they elect their senators.
Filed under: Public Policy, U.S. Constitution |
PurpleSlog - The Future Will Be Kludged 
Federalizing of House district boundary drawing–
The boundaries of House of Representative districts shall be drawn without respect for State boundaries or partisan politics. Districts shall be geographically compact and contiguous with exceptions made only for islands and portions of the US that are not contiguous with the rest of the nation. The redistricting commission shall be comprised of a special joint committee of the Legislature in which all sitting parties are represented equally. The committee shall be led by the current Vice-President, who shall have voting powers only in the even of a dead-lock. The results shall be ratified by the Supreme Court prior to enforcement.
Why? Reducing inequities of representation caused by rounding populations up or down to match the allotted number of representatives. Reducing opportunities for gerrymandering.
I would have to think about it.
I kind of now favor expanding the house to be 1500-2000 members. I would also allow them to work, deliberate and vote from home district offices. There is no reason to be in DC year-round.
I can see both sides of the issue. On the one hand, the technology exists to reduce the costs (travel and operating), risks (decapitation strikes) and limitations (numbers, as you’ve noted) of a physical capitol. On the other hand, new costs would be incurred (maintaining secure connections) along with new risks (having them scheme in person makes catching them easier, failure of network security could enable hackers to control Congress).
Anyway, we’ve got to do something with that rockpile in Washington:P If nothing else, limitations could be eased by adding nearby office space and moving the SoU speech to a conference center someplace.
Another ID: Explicitly give members of congress standing for issues of constitutioanlity and also for seperation-of-power issues between branches of federal government .
trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/01/gov-greg-abbott-calls-for-constitutional-convention-to-take-back-states-rights.html/
The plan lays out nine specific proposed amendments that would:
Prohibit congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state.
Require Congress to balance its budget.
Prohibit administrative agencies from creating federal law.
Prohibit administrative agencies from pre-empting state law.
Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law
Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.
Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.
Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation.
Levin’s amendments include:
1. Term limits, including for justices.
2. Repealing Amendment 17 and returning the election of senators to state legislatures
3. A congressional supermajority to override Supreme Court decisions (overruling what could be a stacked court)
4. Spending limit based on GDP
5. Taxation capped at 15%
6. Limiting the commerce clause, and strengthening private property rights
7. Power of states to override a federal statute by a three-fifths vote.
Single-subject aka Truth In Legislation Amendment
stipulates that ballot initiatives and legislation may deal with only one main issue.
strike down an otherwise-constitutional bill if it violates the rule
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_rule
http://singlesubjectamendment.com/
+Mia Love
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645896/Rep-Mia-Love-wants-to-limit-congressional-bills-to-one-subject-at-a-time.html?pg=all
supreme court terms
http://www.unz.com/isteve/a-single-18-year-term-for-supreme-court-nominees/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=a-single-18-year-term-for-supreme-court-nominees
justice appointment process
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/226746/
“Barnett has proposed a “Repeal Amendment” to the United States Constitution, which would give two-thirds of the states the power to repeal any federal law or regulation.[4] According to Barnett, the proposed amendment “provides a targeted way to reverse particular congressional acts and administrative regulations without relying on federal judges or permanently amending the text of the Constitution to correct a specific abuse.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Barnett#Repeal_Amendment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Barnett#Bill_of_Federalism
“Bill of Federalism”
The amendments, summarized by number below, would:
Disallow federal income taxes (i.e., repeal Sixteenth Amendment), as well as gift, estate, and consumption taxes; allow FairTax; require a 3/5 supermajority to raise or set new taxes
Set limits on the Interstate Commerce Clause
Disallow unfunded mandates, and conditions on funding.
Close a constitutional loophole that allows treaties to override established limits on power
Extend free speech consideration to campaign contributions, and to cover any medium of communication (including the Internet)
Allow a resolution of three quarters of the states to rescind any federal law or regulation.
Establish Term Limits for Senators and Representatives.
Provide the President with a line-item veto to balance the budget on any year in which it is unbalanced.
Reinforce the Ninth Amendment by specifying additional rights and by providing a process for any person to prove the existence of an unenumerated right.
Restrict judicial activism by mandating an originalist method of interpretation.
“We should amend the Constitution to require that each of the nine justices be appointed for a single, staggered 18-year term. Every two years, on Aug. 1 in the first and third years of a presidential term (for example, Aug. 1, 2017), one justice will be replaced. Should a justice’s term end early for any reason (such as death or retirement), the president can nominate a replacement, but only for the rest of that term.”
[…]
“This system will minimize, if not eliminate, strategic retirements. It will guarantee that in any given presidential term, the president will nominate two justices. Finally, any justice nominated by the president should be appointed unless the Senate rejects the nominee by majority vote within 60 days. This will end the stonewalling of nominees, and virtually guarantee an up or down majority vote.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/03/23/supreme-court-merrick-garland-limit-justices-18-year-term-column/82133874/
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/a_federalist_solution_to_the_federal_bureaucracy.html
“I submit that the federal bureaucracy could be tamed by enacting a Constitutional amendment requiring that every federal government agency except the Department of Defense to be reauthorized by a three-fifths vote of all 50 state legislatures every 12 years. Failure to reach a three-fifths majority would result in the permanent and irrevocable shutdown of that department or agency. Any regulations written by an agency that gets shut down by the states would be stricken from the Federal Register, thus returning jurisdiction to Congress and/ or the state legislatures per the 10th Amendment. The annual reauthorization vote would take place one month prior to the end of the federal government’s fiscal year on the first Monday in September in order to allow Congress time to zero out budgets and reallocate funds to other departments as necessary. The reauthorization votes would be spread out over the 12-year period; since there are currently some 500 agencies and departments in the federal government, that amounts to reauthorizing about 40 departments every year.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/04/10/judge-richard-posners-unimpeachable-honesty-glenn-reynolds/100261364/#
elected justices and appellate judges
59 member Supreme Court
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/07/02/make-supreme-court-lots-bigger-59-justices-more-like-america-column/749326002/