The Constitution ..a discussion about Democracy.

The Constitution ..a discussion about Democracy.
  • 476
  • 133
  • 11

My Recent Posts

With everyone arguing so much,  I like to go back to the basics.  Some of this you will know and some you wont..but lets not argue.  Lets talk about our foundation and see if we cant find a way to agree to disagree and yet work together to fix the problems enough to try to repair anything we can as a group of people, not a divided nation.

 

The Constitution…

The first official document to establish basic rights for citizens and outline how government will operate. It was signed on September 17, 1787. It, is considered our largest symbol of Freedom and what democracy is built on.

 

However, some interesting facts you may or may not, know;

This document has 4400 words making it the shortest and oldest document of its kind. With Amendments the word count is 7591.

 

The word “democracy” is not written in the Constitution at all, not even one time.

 

While written in English, some Latin is contained in the document. Such as, ”pro tempore” which means for the time being.  There are others but, let’s move on..

 

James Madison because of his extensive notes and never missing not one “constitutional meeting” is considered the “father of the Constitution”.  Not only did the founding fathers rely on his notes but he actually wrote the physical document.

 

A little known statesmen and founding father wrote the Preamble to the Constitution and the original Constitution of the thirteen colonies known as the Articles of Confederation, therefore while James Madison wrote the Constitution from his notes, the wording used was attributed to….Gouverneur Morris.

 

Everyone should also know that to get the document ratified after signing, Madison and Hamilton went about writing the The Federalist Papers, explaining the new system to the public.

 

39 delegates signed the document and 13 original delegates were not present.   Three delegates refused to sign the document, Edmund Randolph, George Mason, and Elbridge Gerry. George Mason being important because his ideal of “inalienable rights” was critical to Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence.

 

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams did not sign the document since they were both away at the time of the signing.

 

Another fun fact, Thanksgiving? As a national holiday, was declared by George Washington on November 26, 1789 to “give thanks” for the Constitution. Forget the stuff you were taught in school about pilgrims and Indians.  The founding fathers wanted us to know via documents kept, history and even a holiday that this document is the foundation in which the free United States is built.

 

The document since 1952 has been kept at 67 degrees in an argon gas filled case at the national archives.

 

The document itself is clear and was framed in a way that allowed for 3 co-equal branches of government. For the record,  Ive had to explain this to many people over the years so don’t laugh..many people in the US  simply do not know these things.

 

To simplify for the purposes of this article;

Article I sets up he legislative branch of government. House of Representatives and Senate. It  is Congresses’ ability to make laws and raise revenue. Section 8 is a good one to read for duties although that’s not everything and there are restrictions.

 

Article II – The Executive Branch, by far the most abused branch of government for decades now. Which is why we have the checks and balances system.  To simplify the President has the power to appoint a cabinet, and oversee the military. Give a state  of the Union, appoint ambassadors and Justices of the Supreme Court and he is to settle disputes between respective members of legislative branch. Again, these powers have restrictions.

 

Article III -sets up the entire federal judicial system and in addition, remands localities for state affairs. This is the law of the land.

 

Article IV-States rights, more or less.

 

ArticleV- very controversial right now.  Amendments to Constitution either by 2/3 of Congress or ¾ of States who can propose Amendments, which must be agreed upon by the States. More complicated than that..but trying to simplify.

 

ArticleVI  -the debts, supremacy clause, and religious test for oath of office. Now this might be my favorite and also one of the most highly interpreted Articles of this document. In section 2 of this Article are the words ““This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land. “    Its simple..federal law is the law of the land. 

ArticleVII- ratification of the 9, meant the first 13 states, it was an early ratification of 9 to encourage the others to join in.  The framers wrote this section in order for other territories to join as states.

You are going to hear a lot about “rule of law” that has been breached.   It has many variations or assertions. Most of them are wrong. Pertaining to the Supremacy Clause,  after time, the states were enabled to make treaties, something the framers didn’t intend. Something people are Starting to question.  Look up Medellín v. Texas. 

 

There are other breaches in the Constitution over the years, but the rule of law so often referred to are the regulations that encompass Presidential powers and the job of Congress to implement same.

 

At the end of the day, the simplified  interpretation of rule of law means that everyone within that system is subject to the laws of that system.  No one is exempt. They must abide by the laws of the land and in this country the Constitution.  With that being said, the argument does not solely rest here but with the legislative branch of the government. Also the judicial branch of the government which usually steps in for conflicts.   In no part of the Constitution whatsoever, is there a mention of private funding to government OR  a two party system set up to divide the ideals of the framers intentions.

 

But our system is unique with its checks and balances to fix things or balance power under the preface of “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

 

When the system corrupts in one branch and the others are unable to fix  it, what do we do?  Each enumerated set of powers comes with it restrictions and a cure.  But how do you fix a Congress that has only had a balanced budget in 2010 and 2014? How do you fix a Congress that withheld power and duty only to pass things minimally?   Their legislative record since 2010 (the 111TH Congress) is poor.  You tell me if your boss looked at you, with a progress rate at 1-2% if you would get a raise or even have a job. Especially after you told him you had to roll the books over every month because you cant balance the books.  The one thing they Are supposed to do is pass a budget and While right now we want to jump to (GOP vs DEMS) sides, lets just look at the fact that you must do your job, you took an oath of office.  Red vs blue is irrelevant, to those that are of the ethical belief of the Constitution.

 

What we see is politics. I have worked with both Democrats and Republicans and this is all politics…its not the law, or our Constitution. I will give the Senators or Representatives who have left or are leaving credit, even though they contributed to the weakening of the legislative branch, they are getting out  while the gettings good. This way if they want to try again later or in another position, they can.

 

Some people could make this an issue about Trump, in this instance so far, he has taken issue with those he felt attacked him. He used his office improperly only due to the power he commands. Im not writing or commenting on him any further than that. This is about the Constitution and the weakening branches of government.  We don’t know the other side of that.  It definitely is not any upheld rule of law, balanced budget, good schools, clean water, good jobs , closing of the income inequality gap, on and on.  Because its not where the money is.  This is now, and was prior to Trump ALWAYS about the money.

 

You have to first begin with what you believe at your core and if those fundamentals include our foundation, Then pay attention.  We have a problem, it cant be fixed by fighting or anarchy.  You fix what you have or change the foundation of the United States.  Demand it from your representatives, or clean the slate at voting time.  There are other options which as citizens of the US are open to discuss, but as Americans we need to support our Constitution and force legislators to do their jobs. Then we can look at other solutions.

 

As far as the judicial and some arms of executive branch, we aren’t cleaning house, this needs to be done without the politics.   That’s may not be possible at this point in time, I don’t care what color tie you wear or who controls what.   If we don’t stand together as the United People Under the Constitution,  what else do we stand for?   Put it to the side, look at whats happening.  Ive seen this before, but I do a lot of writing and research. This is not new, but it is very dangerous.

 

Note..this is about something I care about. If you write about Democrats, liberals, GOP, Republicans..red, blue, donkeys and elephants. I will most likely delete it.

Comments

wsucram15 Added Feb 4, 2018 - 9:54pm
A lot of reading some light and some heavy.. as always not an argument comment feed.  Just discussion about the constitution.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 4, 2018 - 10:34pm
the simplified  interpretation of rule of law means that everyone within that system is subject to the laws of that system.  No one is exempt. 
 
Were that only what really happens. 
Bill H. Added Feb 4, 2018 - 10:38pm
Good one Jeanne!
In this day and age, probably most people have never read the Constitution, or the ones that did forgot it.
Yes, people- It is time to go back and read it once again (or read it for the first time in most cases).
wsucram15 Added Feb 4, 2018 - 10:43pm
Well Jeffry..that is a definition..and this is EXACTLY what I was writing about.  So Im thinking I know were you are headed with this...but I do understand.  
You are also intelligent, even though I often disagree with you, we just have different perspectives on what this country could be and perhaps once was. 
I dont think anyone can fix the wrong..ever.
But they can try to stop it from continuing...and if the Constitution were enforced, no one is exempt under this law. But it has not been enforced in a long time. 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:34pm
But it has not been enforced in a long time. 
 
"Why do you keep throwing the Constitution in my face its just an old piece of paper" - GWB
 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:38pm
The Constitution and those who still believe in it are ridiculed and prosecuted. Witness the crimes committed against the Bundys by the Federal government.
wsucram15 Added Feb 4, 2018 - 11:43pm
I know Jeffry..if you actually read the article I discuss one of GWB's Constitutional crushes with the help of Congress briefly.  Remember I actually had to study this stuff and we have had some big offenders over the years.
 
Anyhoo...thanks BillH.  It took forever to type with one hand but I watched the Superbowl (I was upset at halftime) and typed away left handed.
Its always amazed me how many people cannot tell me what Article one of the Constitution is..or know the Preamble. Its one sentence.
Flying Junior Added Feb 5, 2018 - 2:33am
I probably know more about the Constitutional Convention than subsequent and contemporary interpretation of said document.  And living in Massachusetts, it's probably part of your DNA.  My two cents about Madison.
 
James Madison because of his extensive notes and never missing not one “constitutional meeting” is considered the “father of the Constitution”.  Not only did the founding fathers rely on his notes but he actually wrote the physical document.
 
My memory told me that Madison holds this honor because of the Virginia Plan.  The Virginia Plan was the first proposal to include a bicameral legislature and the three branches of government, legislative, judicial and executive.  The Virginia Plan proposed that each state would have a representation in both houses proportional to their population.  Thus Virginia with the largest population would have the greatest representation.  This plan was not accepted.  The Convention decided upon the Connecticut Compromise in which representation in the lower chamber would be proportional and each state would have two senators in the upper chamber.
 
For all of the problems I have experienced with those holding different points of view here on the WB, I am glad we don't have anyone who openly criticizes the structure of our government.  I have heard others blame our  difficulties on our unique organization of power sharing and proclaim the virtues of a parliamentary government with a prime minister as if this would solve all of our differences.
Flying Junior Added Feb 5, 2018 - 2:59am
What is the constitutional argument that supports Cliven Bundy not paying his fees to graze his cattle on federal land or that gives Ammon Bundy the right to commandeer, occupy and defend the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge?  I guess the rationale is that states have a right to demand that their land be returned to them from the federal government.  Where is the article found in the Constitution that states that private citizens have a right to demand this of the federal government?  Where is the justification to be found for the Sovereign Citizen Movement?
 
I'm sure the right-wing club on the WB would just feel sorry for me for being ignorant.  But I think that they just throw around the name of the Constitution to support any number of irrational arguments that they support.  Some here have the nerve to say that conservative judges are strict constitutionalists while liberal judges flout the Constitution.  Any judge who uses his office to unfairly promote a political agenda above the even-handed application of existing law is abusing his or her authority.  I see it as the fatal flaw in our system.  We define three co-equal branches of government, but in practice the system gives the courts the ultimate authority to apply the law to reign in abuses of power.  But what checks or balances can undo the will of the courts?
Doug Plumb Added Feb 5, 2018 - 3:46am
Canada had the Family Compact, an agreement with the ruling families that protected us from the banksters. You can't even find info on that on wiki.
  The USA has been converted from a Republic to a Democracy in the mind of its people, a disaster in the making as soon as it starts. The government panders to most people, most people don't read and don't want to think and are both arrogant and ignorant. The vain are so easy to manage.
 
re "But what checks or balances can undo the will of the courts?"
  You knowing the law.
 
  The government, before 1913 had four departments, the one you mention forms the Trinity, then there was the Monetary department, as I learn from Bill Still, of "The Money Masters" movie, online on YouTube - damned interesting too.
  USA was a German country when it was formed, following German ideals of Jurisprudence rather than English ones.
  The constitution was Kantian, as most jurisprudence was back then. Kant explains what went wrong in Metaphysics of Morals and in Religion Within The Boundaries of Mere Reason, if you read between the lines.
  Since 1913, its been converted from a Republic to a Democracy and falling apart since.
  It was the German scholar of law, Von Savigny, that gave them the idea of "for the people, of the people and by the people". This idea was German. The German conception of freedom has been erased from memory.
  I don't know why people call it a democracy.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 5, 2018 - 3:54am
USA has strong German roots and it is Christian in structure. They deliberately took out God from the writing. The executive, legislative and judicial are an example of the Trinity implemented in form.
opher goodwin Added Feb 5, 2018 - 4:30am
Jeanne - that is really interesting. I learnt a lot. Thanks for that.
I noticed this bit: At the end of the day, the simplified  interpretation of rule of law means that everyone within that system is subject to the laws of that system.  No one is exempt. They must abide by the laws of the land and in this country the Constitution. 
This seems to be an idea that people rebel against. They want to be a law unto themselves, not contribute to society and not be part of it (obviously impossible). What it really means is they don't want to pay taxes.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:22am
No Opher....you have refined a very selective outrage reflex which compels you to leap to erroneous conclusions. What people rebel against is when government is law unto itself.
 
Jeanne it is a good tutorial, but what must be remembered about the constitution is that it is only as good as those entrusted to uphold it. What people are disgusted with are parties who hold these seats of authority blatantly ignoring the RULE OF LAW when it suits their purposes and then citing the rule of law when their actions are questioned
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:23am
we must decide if we want the rule of law or the rule of lawyers. currently we are held in the latter
opher goodwin Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:52am
Burger - no I was responding to some of the contributors on here who claimed that all taxation is theft, that the government should not be involved with infrastructure, education, healthcare or just about anything.
I don't believe that. I believe we are all part of this society and should be active in trying to make it work for everyone in a fair way. That is not market forces that only work for those who can pay.
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 6:30am
To paraphrase Franklin, once the voters figure out they can vote themselves money, the Republic is in trouble. 
 
This is what is happening.  Voters want more government services, and less taxes.  They vote in people that promise more, while also promising it will cost less. 
 
Corruption, is less than many other places, but it exists, just like it exists in all governments.   This is made worse by career politicians who once elected are difficult to remove.  Corruption is like cockroaches, you can shift it around, but getting rid of it is very difficult.
 
One problem with our government that the founders did not anticipate.  They intentionally made passing laws difficult, thinking this would allow only really popular laws to get passed.  What we have instead is a process where a minority can stop most anything.  This creates the process where passing laws looks like making sausage, and in the end what gets passed, not only does not work, but doesnt resemble what the law sponsors wanted in the first place.   See Obamacare.
 
It is too easy to attach amendments to laws that have nothing to do with the original law.  See how attaching DACA to the budget bill, causes problems.  This happens constantly and often allows bad laws to be passed to get necessary work done.  Things like DACA and the budget should be debated separately and passed or not, on their own merits. 
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 6:44am
Taxation, at least in this country, as it is currently exercised is by any definition theft. I don't deny the need for the funding of that role for which the government is BY LAW required to perform for the benefit of all it's citizens. I object to the extra-constitutional role that the federal government takes, far beyond it's original charter. 
I do not say NO government. Just one hell of a lot less of it.  We agree that government does a shitty job of things, just for different reasons. You want more, I want less.  Me having less government in no way harms your desire for more. You having more in no way harms my desire for less. Yet.
 
We'll see who's right in the end.
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 6:52am
Burghal, while people can debate whether larger or smaller government is better, the larger problem is that the Constitution designs a small government.  The design starts to fail when the government gets large. 
opher goodwin Added Feb 5, 2018 - 7:22am
Burger - I don't care how big the government is. I want it to work efficiently, provide excellent services (infrastructure, defence, education, healthcare, social services, fire, police etc.) at a reasonable cost and not interfere in my freedoms too much.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 7:27am
Exactly right Bill Kamps! Not too big to fail, it's too big to succeed
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:09am
FJ..the Bundys did not have a Constitutional case on "the property clause", therefore it violated federal law. ie; the supremacy clause.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:16am
Doug..you have no idea what you are talking about the roots would be British and civil law that helped to form this nation.  Almost every institution in the US has some link to the British government and we could not have won the Revolution without the French.
I cant speak to Christianity, except that the forefathers took enormous pains (and this has been upheld) to keep church and state separate.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:17am
but you have lost your mind on the trinity thing. Seriously. Ill mention it in law class..lol.
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:25am
Opher..that is written for any law of any land. No one likes taxes but without them, no government could function.  The objection of some here is paying taxes for the elderly or sick.  Which is disgusting and I have always found repugnant.   Its one of my few "liberal" qualities.. I have a Confucian theory on that. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:29am
Also TBH has a point, rejecting "rule of law" is a problem. The new argument will be this line and there is a point on this, but its been a point for some time.  But for different reasons that are much more serious.  Ive talked about it often on here for 4 years now and have no idea what the catalyst will be but the battle lines are being drawn and it has to stop or the union we share will.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:47am
Bill, agree with you, then disagree.
Money became a problem prior to 2010, but then the flood gates were opened and Congress no longer needed to do anything but negotiate CR's.  
Popular laws are done on a political basis for politics, that was done long after the writing of the Constitution. To me, if its not good for a majority of the people then its not good. 
The PPACA was a unique law, and in breaching that with the tax law they violated "the law of the land" as worded by the Supreme Court which violates Article II section 3.  But thats a legal argument for people that understand constitutional law and its intricacies.  Ive been a part of that debate and its a tough call. 
But I did NOT and will NOT debate a legal argument on here, was strongly advised against it.  This is about the basics of Constitution and weakening of Congress over time.
George N Romey Added Feb 5, 2018 - 8:57am
Great article Jeanne.  The problem we have is that the US has become a complex unwieldy beast to govern. Would we be better off broken up with cooperation between the various regional governments?
Dino Manalis Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:02am
Democracy isn't anarchy, it's based on laws; values; and a constitution to lead and unite us.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:16am
I dont think so although that is a very good suggestion. My problem with it is that it changes the Constitution, the intent is a good one, but it doesnt force a resolution to the problem..however, and...
The war between North and South was vicious. I dont see that working out well, even now. 
Then, Springing from that idea, perhaps we could sit down with agents of various regions for proposals that the citizens in each of those areas will support and can agree on, even if its just one issue. 
Those ppl can then get together with new lawmakers ( I want a clean slate) asap and try to resolve these issues for the people.
When you have the masses..the politicians (especially newbies) will cooperate.  But you need ALL the people behind the Constitution.
Keep thinking..thats a good thought process.  See I knew this could get the juices flowing.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:18am
Dino..what the hell are you talking about?  Contribute on the Constitution.  Read the article..not just the title.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:25am
pretty sure Dino is a bot. i've suggested it before and neither Dino nor anyone else has ever presented anything to contradict this.
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:27am
wsu, ACA may have been unique, but the process is not unique.  My point was, that in order to get laws passed, they are stretched and squeezed until two things happen, 1) they produce an unworkable solution, and 2) they often dont resemble the initial intent.
 
Our government was set up to be inefficient on purpose.  It was designed with the idea that it would be small.  Small and inefficient is ok, huge and inefficient is not good at all.
 
When I talk to friends overseas they wonder why we cant competently do large public works projects, like those that are done elsewhere.  We cant do them, because our government has gotten so big that it has outgrown many of its rules.  We could do big public works, when government was smaller, and it was easier to impose leadership on it.  We could build the interstate highway system in the 1950s, we couldnt do it today, and cant even maintain it today. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:28am
Yeah something is wrong with those comments. They are always off..thats weird.  Autumn..is Dino a bot?
George N Romey Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:30am
Which again makes we think the US is too big to govern as a so called Democracy. We 
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:36am
George, it isnt just that it is a democracy, and it is large.  Also the rules of Congress make it easy for a small number of people to stop something from getting passed, or worse modify it to the point that the law becomes nonsense.  Amendments are easy to tack onto things, so that DACA gets tied to a budget, and probably someone else ties some funding for some museum to the  budget.  This creates a mess because to get someone's vote, you have to give them a favor in the law.  They should not allow amendments that have nothing to do with the underlying law.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:53am
Agreed Bill. And it is entirely within congressional authority to do just that. Jeanne talked about finding an issue that you could take to the people and find nearly all to agree. A move to force action on legislation banning the practice seems like a winner to me.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:53am
we can call it the clean bill bill :)
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:54am
actually I think that attempts to this effect have been made in the past. Would be interesting to find out who shot it down
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:02am
Its like a lot of things, Congress doesnt like to give away its options, because all want to use it to their advantage when the situation suits them.  They  dont like when the other party does it, but when they do it, it is considered good strategy and the end justifies the means.
 
The Speaker can force votes and limit what amendments get put on a law, however they rarely do it, because everyone likes to do it.  Congress is like a bunch of undisciplined children, they want what is best for the individual member, without thinking much about what is good for the institution. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:02am
Do any of you know what an Amendment to the constitution is and that over 11, 000 have been proposed, but only 17 passed (not including Bill of Rights).?
Its not simple or easy in any way. Wow.. why do I write this stuff on here. Omg.
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:05am
wsu, Im not talking about amendments to the Constitution, or anything that would require and amendment.  Congress can change the rules for how bills get amended, without changing the Constitution.  Congress can even change needing 60 votes to get something out of cloture in the Senate, though I dont think that would be wise.  Most of how Congress operates is not specified in the Constitution. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:07am
TBH..lots of people have tried to change or fix Constitution, (see above comment), the problem is 2 party system, money in politics and refusal of either side to work with the other or acknowledge their oath of office.  People have sued Congress as an et al, the President on and on..
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:34am
Well Jeanne the two party system was unplanned, it evolved. Please save the lecture; I know its more complicated than just some organic event. I can even admit, as much as it pains me to do so, that my most admired figure of our founding, Jefferson, was largely responsible for this. He wrote on this, as other topics, quite extensively. Suffice it to say that it was not a feature included in our founding documents.
This may seem a bit facile, but it's a seed, okay? Just follow...
 
I like to use comparisons. In this case I'll say let's use the NCAA as an example. Specifically where it concerns collegiate football ( for our English cousins again, that is the hideous, pointed ball we play with). How many major collegiate programs have fallen victim to the petty and arcane restrictions of the NCAA? And in what universe is it impossible to create a collegiate football playoff, instead of this bastardized excuse BCS? That would be the NCAA universe. So why do these major conferences still put up with their bull shit? Most of them already have their own TV network. Why do they even need the NCAA? What would the NCAA do if they just said " we're out! dont need ya!"? Are they going to bring in the swat vans and bar entrance to the field when these teams turn up to play?
 
So likewise with political parties. Do any state laws require that an individual meeting every other criteria required to get on the ballot be a member of a registered political party? I don't know, I'm asking. Figure you'd have an idea. I don't know of a legal prohibition to the "grow your own" candidate. I know there is a system that places loads of obstacles, but is it really outside the realm of possibilities?
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:36am
and not to pour salt in the wound, but any objective evaluation of Trump's candidacy kinda fits that "grow your own" flavor, at least. The dem rank and file tried to reject what their establishment was determined to hand them and we all know how that worked out
Even A Broken Clock Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:38am
Jeanne, I'm impressed. Typing this while the SuperBowl was on. I'm pretty sure that day was referenced somewhere in our founding documents as a national holiday, was it not?
 
What I find interesting in the discussion about the constitution is how it has fostered so much disagreement for so long as to the intent of the words. I will need to educate myself to some of the other documents you reference showing intent, as I have not read them. But it seems to me that some folks view the powers enabled by the constitution to be inclusive (enabled by clauses like promoting the general welfare), or exclusive (unless explicitly mentioned, don't even think about it). That dichotomy seems to cause many of the issues that we see in politics to this day.
George N Romey Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:49am
Quite maybe our founding fathers created a slow moving government in which change was made difficult on purpose.  However with the lightening pace of society I'm not sure we can operate with such a system. 
Smoke Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:50am
Democracy in west is blessing,however democracy in third world countries is worse than dictatorship...
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:54am
George, they did create a clumsy government on purpose because their big fear was a King or dictator would get elected and change everything quickly.  So they wanted things that were difficult to change, and they wanted laws that had a wide range of support.  They mostly came from England where the King could do what he wanted when he wanted. 
 
They were not designing a government that might be large and managing a trillion dollars of spending competently.
 
So it is not only the speed of today, but the size of things today, that makes things difficult.
 
However, many things can be improved upon, without an amendment to the Constitution.  Most of the rules of Congress were not specified in the Constitution, so they can be changed. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:57am
TBH...Jefferson worked with Madison, but did not pen or sign the Constitution. He did promote its passage, but for a good bit of this he was in France.
 
Ok..are you really comparing the US government (for better or worse) to a college football association? But I see the parallel. However those regulations are in place "supposedly" so people dont go pro in college. It was supposed to prevent colleges from making money as well.
So yes, one side benefited the other did not.
US govt, is not just over regulated (which was bills point not mine),  they have not upheld their duties via their oath of office foe some time.
The people in NCAA..dont take a federal oath of office and are paid by State (depending on college).  Although we do employ them both and often forget this.
 
Im not gong to discuss Trump, this was not about him..it was about Congress before him and now. Take that argument down the road.
 
Some states do bar certain candidates or have such restrictions its difficult to get on ballot in all 50 states.because the 2 parties dont want to lose any %.  Independants have to win a % of the vote..etc.  Its about MONEY and time.
Flying Junior Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:58am
No articles found for Dino
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:00am
but I will add on Jefferson, he did a bang up job on the Declaration of Independence.  Also some people dont know this, but court cases have been won in the Supreme Court based on his intent. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:04am
What I was complaining about was saying an amendment could be attached to a bill in Congress.   Not happening.  Thats called an addendum.
opher goodwin Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:05am
Doug - was America another Jewish conspiracy? Is that why they practiced genocide on the Native Americans and set up brothels, opium dens and saloons? 
Is the flat earth a Jewish conspiracy?
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:05am
weird..right, a very similar comment from this thread made on Mark Henrys thread.
Bill H. Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:10am
 
I'm guessing that Dino is actually part of the constant field testing and upgrading of  IBM's WATSON computer system.
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:12am
perhaps..its something neutral or maybe generic is a better word.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:59am
here you guys go..if you are interested, something I just got this morning. http://sign.actiontaker.org/page/s/constitutional-amendment-ecu-ja?source=Brown&redirect_url=http://sign.actiontaker.org/cu-anniversary-brown-ab
I used to work  with a few groups regarding this topic.  Its pretty interesting.. I had no idea they had gotten this far.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:14pm
I have to go to State House tomorrow, its so weird I wrote about this and then this happened. 
MD which up to now has entertained but rejected this notion, now has a majority in favor of the Democracy Amendment  Resolution. It has always been General Assembly that holds it up.  So with a majority..IDK.
 
Bill H. Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:19pm
Overturning Citizens United would be the first big hurdle towards regaining citizen control of government. We absolutely must get corporate control and influence out of the picture if we want any chance of keeping our system intact.
 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:28pm
We absolutely must get corporate control and influence out of the picture if we want any chance of keeping our system intact.
 
Damn skippy. Never thought I'd agree with anything out of you. 
 
Bill Kamps Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:31pm
What I was complaining about was saying an amendment could be attached to a bill in Congress. 
 
I dont know what you are talking about, bills are amended all the time.  https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/71/amendments
 
Picking a bill at random, you can see the list of amendments. 
mark henry smith Added Feb 5, 2018 - 12:59pm
Dino, a bot? Well, he's a nice bot, always talking about love and togetherness. Very good piece, Jeanne.
 
Okay, what I've seen is that people don't want to pay taxes to things that don't directly benefit them, so old people don't want to pay for schools if they don't have kids using them, and young people don't want to pay for old people, and everybody hate the Jews, to paraphrase Tom Lehr, a Jew.
 
Where in The Constitution does it say the government is supposed to stay small? All I've read is that it assigns certain responsibilities to the government and separates those responsibilities into certain areas. Over time, based on the needs of the country a big or small government might be required, just as a big or small army might be required. There is no call for a standing army in the constitution, but look at what we've got.
 
I think what people are complaining about in bills is riders that are attached without scrutiny at the end of bills before passage. One of these can be seen as being directly responsible for the credit-default-swap, mortgage crisis of 2007-08, in a tiny piece of legislation attached to an appropriations bill by Phil Graham at the behest of RBS, a player in default swaps, making them not subject to the rules of insurance, meaning that the leveraging could be multiple times higher than insurance policies, which in fact they were. No one even thought about what was happening in this area until it imploded.
 
What we have here people is a government that exists for its own existence, when the intent was a government that exists for the will of the people, and governance has become so complicated, so expensive, so entrenched in the two party system, that there is no will of the people, if there ever was. And the NCAA might not be relevant in how a team makes money, but it can certainly make things difficult for a team that doesn't play and pay along. I will now read The Constitution again when I get home. It's in the back of the dictionary. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 1:27pm
Your link is for a budgetary bill with financial amendments...like 1571 which they attempt to balance through 2027.. it will end up an addendum bill..maybe. Otherwise, it is a first order "amendment" which changes the wording of the final document.  Its not its own separate thing and 98% never see the light of day.
 
Have you ever read PPACA?  Do you know how may addendums there were?  Out of 788 Republican Amendments only 147 were implemented in some form into the wording of the bill, those are measures of the first degree. Subsequently..there were Amendments to the legislation to fix or alter it after it was passed into law, as they found loopholes, etc.
 
 THOSE ARE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS in regular order,  Not Constitutional Amendments referring to my article.
Yours is regular order so what is your point and what does this have to do with my article?
You cannot amend the constitution this way, its what my article is about and what I keep trying to bring you back to.  Thats all..
 
Dave Volek Added Feb 5, 2018 - 1:58pm
Great article Jeanne. And congrats for setting up this topic such that the discussion is quite civil--even with different points of view.
 
George had an interesting comment:
 
The problem we have is that the US has become a complex unwieldy beast to govern. Would we be better off broken up with cooperation between the various regional governments?
 
The world is indeed a much different place than 1787. We should not assume that the creation of that year will work well today. Are we witnessing the cracks leading to the foundation coming apart? Or can the building be saved? 
 
George's comment on "regional cooperation" may be part of the answer.
 
As you know, I am proposing an alternative system of governance. In the process of building the TDG, we start locally and get these "neighborhoods" functioning well TDG-wise. In time those neighborhoods will agree to merge, creating a better system of local governance with a bigger area. In essence, this would constitute the regional cooperation George likes to speak of.
 
BTW: I have run across a few thinkers (maybe even on WB) who believe the bias towards the states with lower populations is a serious impediment to the USA's functioning. I disagree, for the problems are much deeper than that.
 
 
 
 
Doug Plumb Added Feb 5, 2018 - 2:13pm
re "but you have lost your mind on the trinity thing. Seriously. Ill mention it in law class..lol."
  They would just laugh, just like you would. The laughter comes from ignorance, the idea comes from Kant, Religion Within The Boundaries...
  Law in the USA has strong German roots, remember they wanted to be away from the idea that government is the source of laws, as the Brits believe. The Germans believe in the transcendent roots of law. You are being trained to be a communist so you would not know of the transcendent roots of law.
  Since when do law students and lawyers know anything about law ? Are you a real law student ? - if so, you would know that. I guess you have read Salmond then? Or have you or your fellow law students even heard of him?
  I know you are practicing Ritual Defamation with me, just don't do it with law, 'cause you will get your little red wagon fixed 8-)
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 5, 2018 - 2:54pm
Sorry being late to the game... I really loved this post!  Especially the refresher course on the Constitution.
 
I agree with much of what you said concerning the problems we now face; such as the expansion and abuse of the executive branch, a corrupt two-party system,  
 
I have two things I think needing more attention in the post.
 
1) Details. Your solutions are two general... Quite fighting, vote 'em out, re-balance the branches...  It's like an adult politely exclaiming "Now everybody calm down" as a couple of hundred students participate in a brawl in an auditorium.  Nothing less than a shotgun blast to the rafters is going to restore calm.
 
2) Scope. I think the abuse of power goes well beyond just the problems you mentioned.
 
I would offer at least one other example problem equally troubling to the republic... That being the creation and power of the bureaucracy.  We have an army of government employees make and enforce law outside the scope of the Constitution and outside their jurisdiction (which belongs to the legislative branch).  The founding fathers never envisioned such a powerful and unaccountable behemoth.
 
Jeanne >> In no part of the Constitution whatsoever, is there a mention of... a two-party system set up to divide the ideals of the framers intentions.
 
True... but wasn't a two-party system set up very quickly after the founding?  The founders themselves operated under such a system very early in the days of the republic.  Did any of them bemoan a two-party system?
 
Granted... our parties are corrupt in this day and age; but what would stop five parties from being corrupt?
 
Jeanne >> We have a problem, it cant be fixed by fighting or anarchy... we aren’t cleaning house, this needs to be done without the politics.   That’s may not be possible at this point in time.
 
It's not (possible)... at least not in the calm deliberative way you hope for.  I admire your belief that it is.  It's just that I discarded that believe so long ago.  Keep fighting though... I am rooting for you.
 
Jeanne >> Do any of you know what an Amendment to the constitution is and that over 11, 000 have been proposed, but only 17 passed (not including Bill of Rights).?
 
Which I consider a good thing.  It should be very hard to amend the constitution.
 
Texas has the exact opposite model... and it's a mess.  (Look everybody!  I criticized Texas!)
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 5, 2018 - 2:54pm
FJ >> I see it as the fatal flaw in our system.  We define three co-equal branches of government, but in practice the system gives the courts the ultimate authority to apply the law to reign in abuses of power.  But what checks or balances can undo the will of the courts?
 
The power of impeachment.  It should be used much, much more often than it is.
Dave Volek Added Feb 5, 2018 - 4:04pm
Lynn
 
I would offer at least one other example problem equally troubling to the republic... That being the creation and power of the bureaucracy.  We have an army of government employees make and enforce law outside the scope of the Constitution and outside their jurisdiction (which belongs to the legislative branch).  The founding fathers never envisioned such a powerful and unaccountable behemoth.
 
No, they did not imagine the behemoth. Their world of 1787 was much simpler than our world today. They didn't need to pass as many laws, hence their legislative processes were designed for those times.
 
So too many laws have been created not by legislators. Here is a list of how this happens:
 
1) A judge may see current laws as not up to current standards. He makes a ruling that is contrary to the written law. To many, this ruling seems common sense, so it goes unchallenged. It becomes a precedent that can be used in similar court cases, hence decision-makers take the precedent into consideration--even though it is not a formal law.
 
2) Civil servants are often interpreting old laws in light of today. Their interpretation is often something the original legislators could not have imagined. To challenge these intepretations in court, well let's just say it is easier to go along with civil servants. 
 
3) Police and prosecutors are always playing a game of which laws to apply or not. A lot depends on the level of financing we give to these institutions.
 
4) Any legislature has finite number of bills it can be passed into law. It is becoming more common practice to put a bunch of unrelated new laws on one bill. This bill usually has things everyone likes, so it is not challenged too much.
 
5) Corporations are investing in bill writing themselves. They purport to fix the problem by handing a bill to the politicians. With the bill already written, it becomes easier to put in the docket. Of course there is some fine print that will put the corporation at an advantage if the bill is passed.
 
6) Once a law is made, it becomes very difficult to repeal it. If the civil service or activists want to keep an obsolete law on the books, it requires--if we are to give the bill due democratic process--a lot of effort from the politicians. But repealing this law often takes energy from passing new bills. So the old law stays decades longer than it should.
 
7) I believe that few of today's legislators read and understand any bills presented to them. They get their voting instructions and speeches to justify their vote from some party hack.
 
All these are signs that our current legislative process is too obsolete.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 5, 2018 - 4:54pm
Dave >> All these are signs that our current legislative process is too obsolete.
 
That... AND that the federal government is doing much, much more that it should.
 
I'm not saying major changes don't need to be made to the legislative process... or to strengthen the checks and balances.  I'm just requesting that part of that reform include scaling back the size, scope, and influence of government.
 
Speaking as someone who has dealt with government bureaucrats his entire life... the rule is it's all about power and money to the point of abuse.  Common sense regulation is out the window as is accountability.
 
Another problem I'm seeing in this discussion is that we seem to be judging the effectiveness of the legislative branch by the volume of legislation they pass.  I think this is a terrible measure.  Sometimes the best thing a legislature can do is make sure something doesn't pass OR better yet repeal laws and regulations.
 
I share the founding fathers distrust of government as a necessary evil.  One that must be watched diligently and controlled (and by necessity kept small).  We gave up both about a century ago.  The fact that we made it this long after that is a miracle.
 
George N Romey Added Feb 5, 2018 - 5:43pm
It just seems to me to expect government to effectively rule for 320 million people is asking too much. As someone that has visited just about every state we are very diverse country just by our land mass. Government could be efficient through a monarchy but that doesn’t translate to a good outcome for the people. My sense is that the US will eventually be broken up and resemble pre EU Europe.
Dave Volek Added Feb 5, 2018 - 6:01pm
Lynn
 
Most government people I had to deal with were front line staff. They are there for the job, following the rules, and giving me their best guess as what to do next. I bear no animosity towards them.
 
Empire building does happen in government bureaucracies. But this also happens in business, unions, and inside political parties. Hell, I could even be accused of building my own one-person empire in my current job. But for some reason, when it is in government it much more evil.
 
Just from my own experience in Canada, government departments are shuffled around so much that it is difficult for a manager build an effective empire that will make him or her indispensable for 20 or 30 years.
 
Nearly all regulations have some rationality to them. We may not like them, but they are based on trying to make the world a little better--not with the intent of making life difficult for non-government people.
 
The problem is when regulations should be amended or discarded, which usually takes another round of legislation. As mentioned, earlier, I say our legislative processes are inept to deal with these necessary changes using due process.
 
When I was in business, I had to mostly deal with provincial bodies, not national bodies. I suspect that it is the same in the USA, where states actually have a greater say than Canadian provinces. So the point that the federal government is overbearing seems like a moot point to me, when the provincial (or state) agencies are responsible for most of the regulations.
 
 
Doug Plumb Added Feb 5, 2018 - 6:53pm
re "Jeanne >> In no part of the Constitution whatsoever, is there a mention of... a two-party system set up to divide the ideals of the framers intentions.
 
True... but wasn't a two-party system set up very quickly after the founding?  The founders themselves operated under such a system very early in the days of the republic.  Did any of them bemoan a two-party system?"
 
There are always two parties, the Rationalists and the Empiricists. The Rationalists hold that law is rational, that equality before the law upholds the law. The empiricists work from Utilitarian principles. The rationalists are fundamentally Christian and the Empiricists use Judaic (matter/communistic) type thinking which is Utilitarianism.
 
I would like to know: What exactly is a "bill" and does it involve money? I believe it does and so do others. I think its a bill from the banksters for another law. Banksters love laws to keep us under their thumb and paying that phoney debt.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:44pm
Doug..yes, shortly after B of R was signed I believe.  Federalist Party and Democratic National Party.
Religion and the law or politics need to be separate. If you work in these areas and have a problem with that, "a conflict" you need to step aside.
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 9:49pm
Dave
I understand that, but you cannot screw with the ONLY thing that is a common thread for at least a majority of Americans.  Although if all these shenanigans keep up, people arent going to care any more because they really feel the document is useless.
Its not the document, its the respect and duty of care given to the men that fought to make this Country a reality. Its more that words..its honor, pride and a way of life that you have to fight for sometimes.  This is one of those times.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:28pm
Lynn..
I left it general on purpose.  I did not mention in my article any full scope of abuse because I said I would not. Although if you look in my comments, somewhere I addressed the executive and judicial branches very briefly.
The two party system just happened after B of R and no the framers weren’t thrilled about it from what I have read, but like us we have differences of opinions. There were Federalists and Democrats.. My only point in that is that the two party system makes it very difficult to get on state primaries and even harder to stay on for voting if you aren’t one of the major parties w/o a % of the vote to begin with. Those two should stay but criteria for independents should be lowered since they don’t have pacs.
Also..when I am looking at what percentage gets passed into law, that would be vs, resolutions. So they do something, but its temporary and a waste of money to continually hash out the same 5 things.   This is their Constituional duty, to legislate, make laws for the people and set the budget. They haven’t done this in years. 
I just think people even with their differences can sit down and save this country, that foundation.
Do you remember after 9/11? How things were different, even just for a minute..?  This is no different, its just not a building burning with people jumping out.
Its everything we know.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:30pm
Dont worry George one of my Professors is betting on China to make the first move in that direction.
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 5, 2018 - 10:41pm
Dave >> Most government people I had to deal with were front line staff. They are there for the job, following the rules, and giving me their best guess as what to do next. I bear no animosity towards them.
 
Then we have had vastly different experiences.  Maybe it's a Canada/U.S. thing.
 
Dave >> Empire building does happen in government bureaucracies. But this also happens in business, unions, and inside political parties... But for some reason, when it is in government it much more evil.
 
Because 1) The have betrayed a trust placed in them (I don't have to patronize a business, join a union, or support a political party)
 
and 2) I'm paying those bastards to try and screw me.
 
Dave >> Nearly all regulations have some rationality to them. We may not like them, but they are based on trying to make the world a little better--not with the intent of making life difficult for non-government people.
 
Some are indeed intended to make life difficult for people and business.  Some are intended to protect interest, like corporations.  Some are misguided at best.  All have the "best intentions" ... which pave the way...
 
Dave >> The problem is when regulations should be amended or discarded, which usually takes another round of legislation. As mentioned, earlier, I say our legislative processes are inept to deal with these necessary changes using due process.
 
I agree... but it seems we're not going to acknowledge the insidious nature and progression of bureaucracy when doing so.
 
Dave >> When I was in business, I had to mostly deal with provincial bodies, not national bodies. I suspect that it is the same in the USA,
 
From my experience, if you want to know just how much &*)*^ you're going to have to eat... just ascertain the governmental level of the bureaucrat "there to help".
 
Local - a bit
State - quite a bit
Federal - a boat load
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:25pm

The balance on the courts is the law, ie-legislative and each branch checks on the others, except executive over judicial rules and cases.  It rarely happens because depending on circumstances that could be a breach of an Article,law of the land..although Ive never seen it envoked.
No right now..Going by Senate's version of Constitution as written,
The major abuses in my opinion only, are these (and I did not want to post this), Article 1, section 5,6,7,8(multiple),9. 
Article II-very little duties written, but section 1, 3 and other federal codes for federal employees/agents. 
Article III- Currently nothing proven, however a case could be made for section 1. 
ArticleIV- I think there is a case possibly based on this right now or a law similar to it, but all states equal.  Tax law violated that. Not sure how thats working out. Also think about section 3, 4 and how that might have been violated in 2017.  Its a big one.
Article V- also possible violations on tax laws (big stretch), however, lots of action here. even w/o that.
ArticleVI- violated in almost every way possible.
Article VII- Maybe?  Not sure on this one...because would being ratified have helped? I dont think so.  See Article IV..
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:32pm
EABC..thank you..read up on some of the origin documents, they are fascinating. If you ever get to DC you can see some of them.  Very interesting.  Philadelphia if you want to see other documents. Just look them up online.
 
MHS..that might have been the best comment you ever made..damn.
wsucram15 Added Feb 5, 2018 - 11:35pm
MHS..Im impressed.  That was  impassioned..Thank you.
Mark Hunter Added Feb 6, 2018 - 3:42am
Well written and a great job of explaining the basics. The tragedy is that anyone should get out of high school and still have to have the basics explained to them.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 6, 2018 - 5:48am
re "Religion and the law or politics need to be separate. If you work in these areas and have a problem with that, "a conflict" you need to step aside."
 
You can say that as often as you want, even believe it, but politics is about electing legislators to write laws and you cannot take religion out of laws. If or when you do, you make the mess out of things that we currently see. You will still find more bibles in a court house than a church. For adults the bible is a law book, for children its about what happens when you die.
  The current and past regimes have worked to try to get religion out of laws, so they confuse people with "separation of church and state". Church is not religion and the church and state should always be separate, but that has nothing to do with the fact that our laws in the West are not to violate the one and only commandment of the NT.
  You should learn about religion before you trash it so much. Getting God out of the legislation is a neccesary step for communism.
   
Doug Plumb Added Feb 6, 2018 - 5:52am
Law school is just communist indoctrination.
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 6, 2018 - 6:14am
Its not the document, its the respect and duty of care given to the men that fought to make this Country a reality. Its more that words..its honor, pride and a way of life that you have to fight for sometimes.  This is one of those times.
 
Here, Jeanne, you have found Zappa's "Crux of the Biscuit"
 
As I said before in the thread the document is only as good as those entrusted to uphold it. Upholding the constitution entails nothing more than doing just that. It does not involve rewriting, reinterpretation or a reconstruction. It says what it says and does not say what it does not say. Instead of examining the document to find what must be changed to correct what is wrong, we should instead examine our voluminous body of statutes and federal departments to determine whether or not they pass muster against the rule of law as defined in the constitution. In many cases they will not, only having survived by virtue of legal precedent established by a court ruling.
 
How much federal power exists that goes beyond those limitations proscribed in the tenth amendment? We don't have that much paper to print it on! If the two parties need to be brought down to get a congress that will follow the rules and exercise their constitutional duties then what the hell are we waiting for? Get independents on the ballot. I know it's not easy, but it's either that or let it all burn and start over. Solutions are not going to be found in republican or democrat party. Each have their loyalty to their party above all else.
opher goodwin Added Feb 6, 2018 - 7:32am
Doug - everything to you is a Jewish or Communist conspiracy.
The bible a law book? The bible is a fiction. It was written by nomadic Arabs between 3000 and 2000 years ago. Incredible that anybody still believes that it can inform law. Law is secular, not religious. Or should courtrooms be equipped with the Tora, Bhagavad Gita, Koran, Book of Baal, Norse Sagas, and all the other religious literature? We'll be worshipping cats, spreading entrails, looking at tea-leaves and sacrificing children.
Leroy Added Feb 6, 2018 - 7:33am
"Instead of examining the document to find what must be changed to correct what is wrong, we should instead examine our voluminous body of statutes and federal departments to determine whether or not they pass muster against the rule of law as defined in the constitution."
 
Amen!
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 6, 2018 - 7:43am
and I would begin with that cherished institution, with us now since September 1979, drum roll please.............Yes, ladies and gentlemen (and those of other persuasion), I give you none other than: the US Department of Education
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 6, 2018 - 8:05am
Hey hey! Ho Ho! Say D O E, they got to go, say hey!
 
Yeah man, I could really start to dig on that groove!
The Burghal Hidage Added Feb 6, 2018 - 8:06am
That my friends is where we begin to deconstruct the beast
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 6, 2018 - 8:42am
Great article wsucram15, I would suggest that the Constitution addresses all the issues presented in the Declaration of Independence. So both document share importance. Do your own check. Besides right of citizens and the ability to alter the Constitution if the Federal Government does not do the people's biting while staying within the bounds of Natural Law.
 
Article Five addresses amendments, Mason two days before the end of the 'convention of colonies', addresses the problems caused by the lack of a strong central government from the Articles of Confederation. Before Mason congress drafted amendments but when pointed out the potential of a corrupt Federal Government the colony representatives quickly add essentially the same means that created this convention for drafting amendments. It didn't change the approval procedure.
 
The reason way 'democracy' is not in the Constitution is because they created a federation similar to others in history including the Iroquois Confederacy which Ben Franklin was very familiar with some of its leaders. They knew the problems that a pure democracy creates.
 
Illinois for example has a democracy form of government as do most states. I call the state the City state of Chicago since both the house and senate are elected by popular vote and more then half of the voters live in the counties that work in the Chicago metro area. City interest 'Trump' the agricultural interest.
 
The senate originally was chosen by the state governments to keep the build up of Federal power. It worked. Today the states in effect must serve the interests of the national government to get approval for their interests.  Senator McCain often serves the interest of illegal immigrants like the bill on DACA that left out a wall.  The State of Nevada tried to enforce Federal law and lost the right in a court decision,  deport illegals.
 
Great article
Bill Kamps Added Feb 6, 2018 - 9:12am
THOSE ARE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS in regular order,  Not Constitutional Amendments referring to my article.
Yours is regular order so what is your point and what does this have to do with my article?
 
First I SAID they were Amendments to Bills.  I never said I was referring to Constitutional Amendments.
 
My point is that there are many  things in Congress that can be changed, that would improve the functioning of Democracy WITHOUT changing the Constitution.
 
One of them is to stop attaching Amendments to Bills that have nothing to do with the underlying Bill.  For example, DACA got attached to the Continuing Resolution.  So in order to pass a budget resolution, the DACA problem needed to be solved.  That is just one example.  How many times does pork get attached to a bill, in order to gain the vote of the Congressperson who wants the pork? 
 
This practice is detrimental to Democracy because it corrupts it, because Bill sponsors have to "buy" votes by attaching Amendment favors to Bills.  
 
Endless Amendments to Bills, often also change the original working of the Bill.  Things get so convoluted and changed that the original intent is often lost, and the Bill moves forward anyway, just so people can say something got passed.
 
Most of the rules of Congress are not in the Constitution, and many things can be changed that would improve Democracy, without having to change the Constitution.
 
 
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 6, 2018 - 10:03am
TBH >> Instead of examining the document to find what must be changed to correct what is wrong, we should instead examine our voluminous body of statutes and federal departments to determine whether or not they pass muster against the rule of law as defined in the constitution.
 
Leroy >> Amen!
 
Amen! 
 
Hey hey! Ho Ho! Say D O E, they got to go, say hey!
 
It would be good place to start!  But there are others… many others.
Lynn Johnson Added Feb 6, 2018 - 10:15am
Bill Kamps >> One of them (things that need changing in Congress) is to stop attaching Amendments to Bills that have nothing to do with the underlying Bill. 
 
I agree with Bill on the overall principle.  Legislation before Congress should concentrate on one issue.  Getting rid of earmarks was a step in the right direction.
 
But at the same time, you must lump some stuff together in the name of compromise.  The current immigration issue is the perfect example.  We can't trust each other to address individual pieces of the issue, so lumping in pieces of what each side wants into one bill is the only way forward.  I'm OK with that as long as the pieces generally address the same issue.
 
Based on experience... I have come to define "comprehensive" as so convoluted nobody understands it and there's no telling what is hidden in it.  If anything, I would add a page/word limit to proposed legislation.  If I can’t read the whole thing in an afternoon… break it up.
Doug Plumb Added Feb 6, 2018 - 11:04am
re "The bible a law book? The bible is a fiction. It was written by nomadic Arabs between 3000 and 2000 years ago. Incredible that anybody still believes that it can inform law. "
 
It seems to be quoted so often by law scholars and there are so many in a court room and it says its a law book. Thanks for informing me Opher !
Doug Plumb Added Feb 6, 2018 - 11:05am
re ""Instead of examining the document to find what must be changed to correct what is wrong, we should instead examine our voluminous body of statutes and federal departments to determine whether or not they pass muster against the rule of law as defined in the constitution."
 
I'll "third" that after Leroy seconded it.
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 6, 2018 - 11:40am
OK..ok..you area all right and in my own way, I have said this as well. I said they cant pass a budget, which is a primary function.  There should not be CR's as a way of negotiation. Congress needs to pass a budget. They need to pass necessary legislation or bring it to the floor for a vote, in regular order.  Not wait for something the President will sign because they want his guidance on what he will sign?  Have you ever heard of the right to overturn veto?  Come on now.  Laws are their job.  Co-equal.
If it doesnt get through, fine..but it needs to come up for a vote..this agenda stuff (on both sides) for the past 5 years has got to stop.
 
But as is..the addendums or "amendments" are part of regular order now for the wording of the document.  Also think about the stuff in a Bill you dont see...lol.
wsucram15 Added Feb 6, 2018 - 11:44am
Thomas.. Thanks....I know about the relevance of Declaration of Independence as far as intent, and its weight in SC.  Remember yet again..I actually have to study this stuff.  I mentioned it somewhere in this thread. But thank you.
Wait until you guys read the next one...
 
wsucram15 Added Feb 6, 2018 - 11:58am
Im not talking about anything except Articles 1-7 in this post..no B of R..not yet. Ppl get upset over B of R.  
 
Maybe..Thats next...or perhaps how legal system is set up and really works and theory behind it. A lot of misconception there.
 
Doug...since you think that I feel sorry for you, I have actually known people that escaped communism.  It's screwed on a thread where I am defending my country's Democracy and its founding document, you would insinuate I would tolerate that in my life. 
No, I find religion is more of a prison..but at least its voluntary, unlike communism.    Jump off my thread.  sorry.. 
wsucram15 Added Feb 6, 2018 - 12:16pm
Mark..They dont teach American Government in a lot of schools now, this is super basic stuff. 
I have taught ppl this govt, and other basic stuff.  But it was fun. I stood in a couple of times in business law class on days when we discussed federal law statues, like bankruptcy law..its really specialized and in that class students need to understand the filings. 
In other classes too..where I could contribute.  Been doing this most of my life.  
mark henry smith Added Feb 6, 2018 - 2:08pm
Thread too long, I'll put my comments in a new post called,
Ideas not in The Constitution that people think are based on what I read in Jeanne's post.
Jeff Michka Added Feb 6, 2018 - 7:03pm
Now ol Marko the Heelers is upset that someone (wsucram15) knows something more than he does, and needs his own article where he can control comments.  Is ol Marko brilliant author or merely pathetic joke, or both since according to him, there are two of him.
mark henry smith Added Feb 7, 2018 - 1:39pm
See all, this is what I have to put up with from trolls like Michka, who obviously has some problem with my fiction writing, maybe feels threatened by my new outlet, the smart phone, since this rash of attacks began about the time the smart phone came into my possession.
 
Anyway, I wrote my own post not to have another long comment run this thread to ... And from what I read, Jeanne plans to do the same. Jeanne has had to put up with trolls too. And it made me laugh when she said my comment here was the smartest comment I'd made.
 
I thought the smartest comment I'd made was that we're all black if you go back far enough, and thus all Jewish, all everything, making the all men are created equal thing have weight. But we're not all equal after birth. That seems obvious.
 
Hey Michka, why don't you put all of you complaints about me in a post? Rather than going off topic everywhere to troll me? And you may not have read my comments, but I'm pleased to read smart people making smart posts and replying with smart comments. I don't pretend to know everything, just enough to write interesting stories. I really enjoy learning new things, that's why I like writebeat. Of all the sites I've seen on the internet, this is the most thought provoking and challenging. You may blush now Autumn and mysterious brother.
 
And your comments, Jeffy, show neither smartness or fun-ness. Just boringness and boarishness.
 
Jeanne, rock on, girl. I now see that Doug Plume is correct and our Constitution does not permit communism, since it is a system of government that would infringe on the rights of private property. Good to learn that, but so does incarceration before trial infringe on the right not to be punished before trial and conviction.
Eric Reports Added Feb 7, 2018 - 1:49pm
Without $$$, Trump couldn't have been elected; however, HRC outspent him and still lost.
mark henry smith Added Feb 7, 2018 - 3:28pm
I'm just sitting here waiting for the rain to stop a bit before heading out.
 
I imagine the Founding Fathers never would have seen the value of elected office rise to these numbers and if they had, I'm sure they would have put some safeguards in place, perhaps guaranteed publically funded elections, so ideas are what get people elected.
 
Hillary was also a money candidate. The worst candidate possible. But her people didn't think it mattered against Trump. I have never heard such awful, uninspired speeches. I have never seen such mismanagement of a lead. It's as if the Eagles in the last two minutes started taunting the refs, calling their refereeing deplorable, a way to get everyone not with you, against you.
 
All of the ingredients that got the colonists to rise up against the British monarchy and form this more-perfect-union are in place now. We have taxation without representation, a tax-system that favors the rich to the detriment of the poor. No, we have an entire system that exists solely for the benefit of the wealthy. Even programs for the poor are really handouts for the wealthy. The rain is letting up. All of this legal talk is tiring. Jeanne, my admiration grows. And not just all of that legal explaining, but all that one-handed typing too.     
Jeff Michka Added Feb 7, 2018 - 6:40pm
threatened by my new outlet, the smart phone, since this rash of attacks began about the time the smart phone came into my possession.-Yeah, THAT'S IT, Marko!!  You seem to always bring my name up in almost ever comment or article you write, then complain if I FIGHT BACK AGAINST YOUR STREAM OF LIES ABOUT ME.  And anybody with any smarts just realized you are another complete moron with a cellphone fixation.  Wow...my spies did tell me, of course, and unless you wipe the phone completely, I'll be turning the camera on remotely and spy on you, of course, then publish the footage on one of many "anti-Marko websites I've set up to defame you.  What a raving paranoid you are, Marko. 
George N Romey Added Feb 7, 2018 - 8:03pm
Marko great comment, ignore the “noise.”
wsucram15 Added Feb 8, 2018 - 8:06am
MHS..on this thread..dont be silly, you have had some outstanding articles and comments.  You have a good bit of insight, sometimes.  One of my favorite reads...
I dont always agree..but your perspective is always fascinating.
This thread was meant for discussion about Constitution, not politics or cell phones.  Just the laws of the land.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 8, 2018 - 8:37am
Division of power in the government came to be because the founders realized man are not angles, said Madison in the Federalist Papers.  Different ways of choosing representatives and having different lengths of office were designed to combat factions.  Limited powers that are enumerated was meant to deal with both non-angles and factions. Faction is people that share common legislative goals.  The Problem also pointed out by Madison in the FP is when shared interest of different factions conspire to achieve the common goals that serve a now narrower constituency at the expense of other goals. 
 
The representatives for example serve the goals of lobbyist for which they receive money to campaign and insure the defeat of opponents.  The interest of the lobbyist are not always in line with the voters.  Example restrict entry of new companies into an industry thus less supply and less advancement increases profits, the inverse cost consumers more.  
 
What has broken down is the balance since bureaucrats that are not elected and secure position create the vast majority of laws, enforce the laws and adjudicate them.  All from the same department.   The legislative branch have given away the power to create laws so that they are not blamed for the results.
 
Enumerated powers has broken down.  The judicial branch has allowed a very broad view that has turned the constitution in a flexible document with only limits that are advantageous at the moment.  The breakdown of division of power has occurred because the judicial as allowed department in the executive branch to perform the judicial and legislative functions. 
 
The Amendment 17th in 1913  that ended the selection of Senators by the state legislature ended Federalism.  Factions are much harder to create across the state legislatures that are separate by distance and economic environment.  The legislature's leash on their representative was lost.   The states would automatically choose to do functions instead of send money to the central government and have them do them within their state.  So Federal government and the bureaucracy would be much smaller do to self interest expressed by the Senate.  
 
I am not sure how the nation would deal with huge corporation like Goodall, Amazon, etc..  The states can not deal with them. 
 
The states are a major cause for the health care situation because they built borders between states.  I am not sure if those barriers would have developed if Federalism still existed.  The interstate commerce laws should allow the sale of insurance across state lines thus ending the barriers.  The lose of Federalism and court decisions have messed up interstate commerce principles.   
mark henry smith Added Feb 8, 2018 - 12:03pm
Very interesting comments Thomas.
 
Thank you Jeanne and George and all. I really don't care about people like Jeff Michka, Ben Goldstein, my brother, or sister. I'm done with worrying about all of the ways they can hurt me. It's like any person who has been mistreated for a long time, like the colonists, to relate it to this thread. The powerful do unjust things and bear no consequence. You get angry but have no recourse because your power is limited. You express your anger, you think about remedies, you attempt to build the coalition that will allow a day of reckoning. Until it happens you don't know if it will ever come about, but you plan for it, you write the necessary documents, you prepare. When the day comes, after the fight is over and you have won, you don't follow the defeated back to their homes to do unto them as they have done to you. That was never your desire. All you'd ever wanted, all you'd ever fought for, all you'd ever dreamt of is freedom. The freedom to savor the rewards of your efforts. The freedom to live in peace.
 
I'm having so much fun with the phone, with writing, with living for the first time in a long time. My health is excellent. I believe it's time to sell my first novel that has been in the works for twenty-five years, Making Noyes. The title has myriad meanings. In this electronic age to not be on-line creating an on-line audience with your good work is to be doomed to pilferage and piracy.    
wsucram15 Added Feb 8, 2018 - 12:20pm
MHS...then you should enjoy, life is a journey and to be enjoyed.  Dont sweat the small stuff. 
Jeff Michka Added Feb 8, 2018 - 2:26pm
When the day comes, after the fight is over and you have won, you don't follow the defeated back to their homes to do unto them as they have done to you-HOW CONSTITUTIONAL...your intellectual dishonesty is showing.  You weren't accepted instantly as a "genius constitutional scholar" so it was change the topic back to Marko who can only sweat small stuff. AS EACH SECOND GOES BY, SOMEONE IS OUT THERE STEALING Marko's work.  LOL,  So hurry, put it all in your basket and run.  FABIO "He was all over my fiction" IS REPRINTING ALL YOUR FICTION TO BUY GREECE, THIS TIME. BZZZZT. YOU lose. 
mark henry smith Added Feb 9, 2018 - 12:30pm
Greece? Reprint away. That was the point. No smart person puts anything on line without knowledge that it can be taken. PDF? So what. A determined typist can copy it. The work was stolen way before you came along, Michka, and all of this has been a method to right that wrong. The method of a genius who practices Ni To Ichi strategy.
 
You want proof? I'm still here. Isn't that scary?
 
To get back to this thread and away from the insane ravings of a lunatic who has done too much acid, I think, has fried too many brain cells. What all free people want is to gain the rewards of their labor. No one wants to be stolen from and not have a means to pursue justice. It's one of the terrible things about the world we live in, that the wealthy and powerful are not held to the same standards of behavior. The United States was supposed to be a land where all men/women are created equal under the law. It is not a workable system, but is an ideal.
 
The system of checks and balances, as I have said in past posts, is a method to get the most powerful, wealthy, and aggressive parties to fight amongst themselves, since these are the people who will rise to the top of any organization they get involved in by the nature of their characters. The less driven, less intelligent, less fortunate will always be pawns in the machinations of the powerful who have an insatiable desire to lead. The genius of our system is that it rewards initiative and striving and pits that system of rewards against itself. That's how it's supposed to work, but if the system becomes dominated my money and debt, with all actors being beholden to that standard of pay-to-play, the dynamic of internal struggle amongst the powerful gets thwarted.
 
Wealth gives advantage in any conflict, in any claim. It allows one party to buy investigators, harassers, mercenaries, work the court of public opinion, make life uncomfortable for the poor parties. The crown had all of the best soldiers, all of the best equipment, but they lost to the determination of a group of dedicated fighters who wanted a better life for themselves and their descendants. Who resented being treated as second-class citizens in their own home.
 
Whenever I fear for myself, fear losing my desire to make my dreams reality, dreams that full of good purpose and good values, I think of that little girl in Pakistan, Malaya, who stood up to men with guns. Who stood on a podium before the world and expressed the desire of good people everywhere. Let us learn. Let us all learn and speak freely about what we discover to be true. Let our ideas battle in the sphere of public opinion. Let's not let ignorance and intimidation win.
mark henry smith Added Feb 9, 2018 - 12:48pm
And the men who built this nation were all powerful, educated, determined people, not wall flowers. They all had strong opinions about how the documents of incorporation should be written. I do believe the document that resulted is reflective of the arguments these strong egos engaged in.
 
I have hope for our system because it is a malleable system much like my martial art, Shrengi Kempo. What are the three aspects of government that correspond to the three aspects of the body, physical, spiritual, intellectual? Money, that is the physical presence of government, the muscle. Law, that is the spiritual belief system that keeps the citizenry respectful. Intellectual has to be the president, who is supposed to be the wise thinker setting forth new direction for his people.
 
In Shrengi Kempo the master develops exercises in all three areas so a body out of balance can be brought back into balance. A master realizes that the body is never in balance, but is always being pulled by nature. A master learns to see evidence of misbalance and apply the appropriate corrective measures to institute healing, an on-going process until death relieves us.      
Jeff Michka Added Feb 10, 2018 - 12:57pm
The work was stolen way before you came along, Michka, and all of this has been a method to right that wrong.-So I stole your work, Marko?  In Shrengi Kempo the master develops exercises in all three areas so a body out of balance can be brought back into balance. Ah, Master Marko, eh?  SELF-DECLARED MASTER, LIKE THE SELF DECLARED GENIUS, EH?
mark henry smith Added Feb 10, 2018 - 1:21pm
Ah Michka, misconstruing again. You said about Fabio, what's the point in trying to explain things to you? Here's a question for you, you have nine penny's all looking exactly the same, one's fakes and weighs slightly less, how do you figure out which one in two weighings. That's simple.
 
No, my first-grade teacher called me a genius. I read, Saved by Porn, this morning, the woman at the library told me it was a work of genius and she was a librarian and fan of F. Scott Fitzgerald. I worked hard on that story. Oh and Jean Berg told me I had genius. And when I made those three birdie putts in a row the guy I was playing with told me my one-handed putting was a stroke of genius.
 
I'm sorry that you feel so inferior and have to bash me on this site. I know what your intention is. Sorry. Others have tried. Time for you to move on to better things and stop wasting your time, if you have any left.
Jeff Michka Added Feb 10, 2018 - 4:44pm
Time for you to move on to better things and stop wasting your time, if you have any left-Why you may get away with this crap, Marko. I'd like nothing more than to haul your ego into court and watch while it gets whittled away.  I bartered billable time from my attorney, but would have to pay process servers. tHERE ARE ACTUAL EFFORTS IN REAL COMMUNITIES AND REAL PLACES, having f*** all to do with fictional Markos that can use both my time and money.  That said, I might decide taking you down and out is a better use of my time and resources.  The guy who declared you a golfing genius has an envelope for you...might get thanks from Family Marko and others for doing so, too.  You aren't ever responsible, but you will be held accountable.
Jeff Michka Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:11pm
I will apologize to wsucram15, but "hero Marko" wants to keep this spread around.  Must all be my fault, he says so...LOL
George N Romey Added Feb 10, 2018 - 7:27pm
What I said in another thread.  The US just seems to have become too big and too diverse to manage.  For all practical purposes Miami, Boise, and Seattle could be in different parts of the world.  With huge size comes the incentive and ease of corruption.  Look at the banking industry.  When banks were regulated to one state the failures were near non existent.  Then banks became these monsters spanning coast to coast and beyond.  Suddenly their demise might crash the global economy.  If the Bank of Fruitland (a local bank when I was in college in the late 70s in Salisbury, MD) crashed the depositors got their money insured up to the FDIC limit (at that time an entire $25,000!), the bank closed, the bank officers thrown in jail, and the assets sold to a healthy bank.  Today Citicorp or Bank of America fail and billions of people will be in bread lines for years to come.  So we can't let those banks fail.
 
I think we'd do better with the US split up into 4 to 5 countries with treaties established for things like trade, visitation, immigration, etc.  Europe did it from 1946 until the EU, which never lived up to its grand expectations.  Scandinavian countries seem to do just fine in part because its much easier to get government to truly represent the people.  People often say its because they are smaller and more homogenous.
wsucram15 Added Feb 11, 2018 - 9:23am
The house Resolution #7 Passed the MD State Senate..you now have 29 states.  The vote was 29-18 for Amendment to Constitution to remove money from politics and one other to limit terms in Congress.
Whooo  hooooo!!!!!
Stop arguing everyone.
mark henry smith Added Feb 11, 2018 - 2:51pm
Isn't arguing what we do on writerbeat?
 
We have seen so many of these situations where there can be no resolution for a variety of reasons. One is that some people here use aliases, so if they're someone you've know in real life, they have an advantage being able to attack you in ways you can't respond to. So what, I say? If it has to go to the mattresses, let it go to the mattresses.
 
And Jeanne that's a start, but I've liked what a lot of people have said about term limits, that if you really think it's better to have inexperienced people in political positions when you go to have surgery ask for the inexperienced doctor.
 
Now I understand that there's a fear about long-term corruption in the political ranks, but from what I'm seeing the worse fear should be these people who come from business with huge business and PAC dollars behind them, who get elected to do the bidding of businesses and PACs, are booted out of office by an electorate that they've failed to represent after a term, and then go back to business. A political revolving door is not what we need.
 
Let the people decide how long someone should stay in office. If the Founders had thought the people weren't reliable restrainers of bad actors, they wouldn't have trusted them to do the job. Term limits are a terrible way to keep the best and the brightest doing what they do best.     
 
I would even argue that term limits on presidents should be abolished. Anyone who can run and win should be allowed if they meet the qualifications. Hit a button somewhere and became italicized.  
wsucram15 Added Feb 11, 2018 - 5:23pm
Not now..People are fighting against it. there will be problems but not as much if legislation CAN correct it.  Right now, it allows and encourages it.
Thus why ppl are fighting so hard.  The people that dont fight hard for this, have allowed it.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 11, 2018 - 5:46pm
I do no put my hopes in term limits.  Before the arrival of the robber barons in the late 1800's the typical House member served a term or two.  There was not swamp to fund a campaign for these congressmen.  They didn't make money as a representative. 
 
You see so long as term limits also doesn't end stuffing money into the pockets of congressmen then the change will be small.  The congressmen need to not profit form knowledge gained or contracts let out and the change in regulations that favor one company over another.  This is the private part of the swamp that pumps money into the swamp.  That money is consumed by all the government employees elected and non-elected.  
 
To shrink a department or drop a program the swamp will rise up against such changes.  President Reagan said, "Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth." 
wsucram15 Added Feb 11, 2018 - 6:07pm
It isnt just term limits, its the money.  But other states have requested other things.  I do think that is a part of the problem though.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 12, 2018 - 2:17am
 when you go to have surgery ask for the inexperienced doctor.
 
Granddad always cautioned that one should always remember doctors are just practicing. 

Politicians on the other hand are world class scammers. 
 
mark henry smith Added Feb 12, 2018 - 3:08pm
I don't get it. Why is a business person who goes into politics not a politician? The moment you enter politics you are by definition becoming a politician, doing the work of politics. To a philosopher this is madness.
 
I don't here right wingers talking about lawyers who get into office being business people, but they are. just as much as the guy who runs a tech firm. They employ people, create a product, know all of the details of running a profitable enterprise, but we have decided to separate intellectual pursuits from tangible pursuits as if one is more valid. More madness. And why isn't a teacher better suited to run the government than a business owner?
 
From what I've seen the politicians are all acting like a bunch of seventh graders for the most part. Or perhaps we need ring masters to direct a bunch of clowns. Certainly a head clown is not what we need.
 
And Thomas, you're right. To some politics is a gravy train, but I don't think length of service is why. Jeanne, let's hammer that home, take the money out of it. Take the money out of drugs. Take the money out of prisons. Take the money out of politics. Make all ads on the airwaves limited and free, because that's become a gravy train for the owners of stations using our airwaves and an incentive to create the illusion of all elections being close, when they shouldn't be. Clinton/Trump never should have been close. It was made close by the media.  
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 12, 2018 - 7:04pm
The first change that is required is to have congressmen live under the same laws as citizens.  Typically you have to remove them from office before criminal action can be taken.  The state legislatures need to have the power to bring their representative up for review and remove them from office as well as the congress itself.   
wsucram15 Added Feb 12, 2018 - 7:52pm
Well there is a good bit of debate over that.  You can sue anyone in the US over anything...but you would lose because first even above the protections of Con law..
Its a tort..and you have to prove the 4 levels of same. Under Federal Tort Claims Act alone, you would get smashed.
So yes..this might be one of the first columns in which we agree on most things.
Im saying clean the slate..so they have to go...ALL of them.  Then we need to Amend the Constitution to never have money in the political process again.  Thats it.
 
mark henry smith Added Feb 13, 2018 - 3:04pm
I'm right with ya Jeanne, but unfortunately for that to happen we had to have Trump to make the flaws so great, really great that they can't be ignored. My fear is that before anything can be done, we get another war, another terrorist attack, something to cement the security regime, status quo in place.
 
In reading The Constitution, I'm shocked at the civil liberties we've abandoned. It's a slippery slope we're on. Or perhaps a new age of better government in the making. We'll see when the Trump cloud clears.   
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 13, 2018 - 4:28pm
Mark H S.,  the echos of this can be hear through the centuries, " Or perhaps a new age of better government in the making. "  New and better government is not the norm Mark:  American Revolution, French Revolution, unifications of the German and Italian nations, 1840s in Germany, Poland, Ireland, and Hungary, Russian, WWI after effect Italy, Germany, Turkey, Spain, WWII after effects China, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemalan, Hungry, Indonesia, Iran, Nicaraguan and I am sure I missed some.  Mark the out come to me is mostly disasters for the people.  Go back in history and the results doesn't improve.  The usual problem is a 'promise that I as leader can solve your problems' become the leader and the only thing that leader does is solve is own financial situation by becoming wealthy and powerful.  All paid for by the sweet and blood of the citizens. 
Jeff Michka Added Feb 16, 2018 - 6:14pm
I'm right with ya Jeanne, but unfortunately for that to happen we had to have Trump-And ol Marko will do as much about money in politics as Geo Romey:  nothing.  Marko is searching for allies here and will say anything to get them, but he's now "The political activist and champion of democracy", just add water.-In reading The Constitution, I'm shocked at the civil liberties we've abandoned.-Wow, you read the constitution?  I take it, from all your hyperbole, you are gonna be a "leader," eh?  LOL
mark henry smith Added Feb 17, 2018 - 1:11pm
No, Jeffy, I'm gonna be a writer. That's what I do, write, and perform my work. It's fun stuff. What are you gonna be? Whatever you are now I would recommend finding something that makes you happier. You appear to be a rather dismal excuse for whatever you are.
 
Great word though, hyperbole. God willing.
 
Your venom is my Listerine. 
Jeff Michka Added Feb 17, 2018 - 5:06pm
That's what I do, write, and perform my work.-So what is all this crap I'm getting from you?  Writing or performance?  Your smears are at par with the former lead puntinista on WB, made for the same reason: "Oh, if Marko or JenJen keep saying he's an emotionally crippled nazi lover, EVERYONE WILL BELIEVE IT.  True, online audiences aren't very deep, but this tactic gets played so often in all the social media sewers you play in, it's old hat. Yeah, that's it, excon fictional Marko.  Maybe some day you'll have a relationship in your worthless ass, nonproductive life that will stick around you for more than 5 minutes.  There's something about you that chases people off, and want to include that on the next anti-Marko website I put up, and on the handbills scattered about "Your town" to defame you, fictional Marko.  Keep gargling, you'll strangle sooner or later.  You keep claiming how fictional you are, so better check "Team Marko" to see if you've any fictional standing to sue, fictional.  You don't.  Maybe Marie (a fictional woman that "healed you" will call you back if you confess.  LOL  OF COURSE YOU KNOW ME, YOU DIDN'T BLOCK ME ON THE RIGHT SITES like you claimed you were doing when all those people in libraries were staring at you while they looked at their social media accounts to see what you'd done now.  You appear to be a rather dismal excuse for whatever you are.-Uh huh, IT'S ALWAYS someone else that's the excuse, Marko...never Marko.  LOL  LETS SEE A LITTLE CONSTITUTIONAL FICTION FROM YOU, NOISE.
 
mark henry smith Added Feb 18, 2018 - 4:22pm
Wow, so much space for so little said. I didn't try to block you. I was told it didn't matter. That you don't matter. How do ya like them apples?
 
Your venom is my pinot noir. 

Recent Articles by Writers wsucram15 follows.