what constitutional amendment would you make

if you could add one amendment to the constitution (or equivalent for your country) what would you choose?

the rules:
it has to be a law for your own country (i cannot make Iran STFU or something)
you have to justify it
and you cannot make amendments for more amendments (like wishing fo more wishes from a genie)

this should be interesting seeing what poeple think is the most imporant issue facing their countries today.

my amendment would be for transparency and honesty in the government. no more signing statements, secret prisons, etc. refuse to ratify a law, admit you torture people, whatever. just be honest about it or lose your job and any pension you would have.

 

I think waste output from factories should be reduced so people with STFU about global warming

 

I would ammend that all corrupt and stupid politicians be banished from holding office. To determine if someone fits, a vote from all the people in the area the represent would need to be taken.

This would keep, Bush and company from destroying the planet by the time his term is up. It would also let the people, not the corporations finally get back control of a government that is supposed to belong to them!

 

They're attempting to do that though. But the people in power don't want to sign thier nation up to agreements which sees their country forking out billions on alternative energy sources, when the next day their neighbour opens up a cheaper, more enviromentally disregarding coal powered power station.

My amendment: Declare Northern Ireland a free state from both Irish and English rule.

I have many more to add to that surrounding the conception of the Northern Irish free state, but we're only allowed one.

 

I'd like to see an amendment that prohibits discrimination based on considerations not directly related to the issue at hand.

Currently anti-discrimination laws in the US are based on the thory that "Discrimination is allowed unless it's specifically prohibited". The "phohibited discriminations vary from one locale and agency to another, but are generally race, gender, national origin, age (over 40), marital or familial status, etc. That means that you can discriminate against someone based on sexual orientation, genetic infrmation and age (if they're under 40).

In essence, such a change would force businesses and organizations to make the basis of their decision-making visible and to defend those decisions based on rational criteria.

I'd alos like to see an amendment which states that the President cannot deploy US troops in a combat situation for more than 30 days without a specific authorization from the Congress. Currently the president can do anything he wants with the military and there is no way the congress can reign him in short of refusing to fund the action.

Finally, a constitutional right to privacy would be nice The current rights of citizens to privacy from government and corporate intrusion is not explicitly stated, but rather cobbled together from onterpretation of a number of different laws.

The biggest change I could hope for is not a change to the constitution, but rather to the populace. My most hoped for change is a nation of intelligent people who give a damn. Sadly, now I'm really dreaming.

 

for me, simple. legalise/decriminalise marijuana ¬_¬ ffs it has to happen some day

 

Proportional voting system.

<A88>

 

And one which can be independantly run and supervised with inspections.

 

has anyone else had problems with email notifications? i assumed nobody has replied to this thread, but i saw 8 replies when i was browsing the forum just now.

checked my trash too, i didn't just delete it by accident

 

How would you see that working in practice?

 

i read about an interesting system where you can vote multiple times, but only once. you would mark all people you would be ok with being president/mayor/___

it seems like a pretty cool system, especially for people like me who rarely have a person who completely agrees with their ideals. i describe myself as a constitutionalist.

PS got an email notification this time. WTF?

 

By splitting the number of MP's to the same percentage figures as the entire uk voting figures. The parties put forward a list a people they want to stand for election in the order they would like them to be elected and roberts your mother's brother you have a more accurate representation in charge.

This does mean you vote for a party and not a person, however it seems to work that way in this country anyway. Use local council elections for voting for the person

 

Aha, I see. Wouldn't work here I'm afraid as we are stuck with this dumb two-party system and canidates are all over the map issue-wise. I think I would rather see it go the other way in which canidates are not listed on the ballot by political affiliation. I would hope that this, combined with instant runoff voting might bring a little more sense into the elections here.

 

Proportional representation has various possibilities, and I think the main issue with putting it in place is first trying to choose the right type of voting system to use...there are various possibilities, such as QMV, List and STV. Picking one that people will understand and will allow them to chose their own local representative is the main issue, but I think it's important that we replace 'First Past the Post' which tends to lead people into voting for either Labour or Tory as a safety vote instead of choosing the candidate they really want in power.

<A88>

 

How did I know you would say that.

I would eliminate the two party system, too little gets done and little of it is in the interests of the people.

 

Well, I'd love to ban the Daily Mail/Daily Express, shoot all morons and hang the Conservative party like the scum they are, but that's illegal.

I can't think of anything I'd really want to do apart from push more public funding into science and/or get rid of VAT (But that's against EU law, would that count?).

 

mainly i would like to get rid of the electoral college, get rid of income tax, and place a cap on sales tax so that the government will be forced to make good use of the money they are given.

Also a maximum amount of years as a politician would be nice to help get rid of all the career politicians that have been holding offices for way too long.

The legalization of most drugs should also happen. Most of the anti-drug laws were originally based upon racism towards the minorities that used them. I do advocate that the regulation of hallucinogens is very important, however.

 

The way I would ammend the British constitution would be to create one. I know we don't really need it, but it'd be nice to have some inalienable rights that the politicians can't mess with because of whatever new and improved imminent threat to our very being they come up with.

 

We have one, it's just not codified, which I'm happy about personally. It means our political system can grow organically and modernised when it needs to be, isntead of having a system like America where barely anything has changed since its formation. Sure, security is nice but so's flexibility, and to be honest our constitution hasn't been dramatically abused so far.

<A88>

 

Not true. Firstly, the War Powers Clause of the Constitution (Article One, Section 8, Clause 11) explicitly states that only Congress has the power to declare war. In terms of deploying troops, under the War Powers Act of 1973, the President is obligated to inform Congress of all military actions with 48 hours and cannot keep troops deployed in a region for more than 60 days without Congressional approval.

It doesn't really matter though, because Congress has never refused a President's request for authorization.

I agree it would be nice to see it stated explicitly, but it is already stated implicitly in the Constitution. U.S. Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut ruled that the Constitution protected the right to privacy.

Personally, I'd like to see a flat tax (with a negative income tax, i.e. Friedman) enacted to replace the current income tax system.

It should be noted that the Federal government has no power to abolish or cap sales taxes or any state taxes, for that matter. If a Constitutional amendment were created allowing the Feds to do it, we would probably see new state taxes created to replace it.

Nearly every elected office in the U.S. has term limits, except for the House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. My problem with term limits is that they seem to infringe on my basic democratic rights. Shouldn't I be able to decide if I want my representative to continue serving if he/she's doing a good job? I find it highly ironic that you'd suggest replacing the Electoral College (assumedly with a popular vote-based system), but don't trust the voters enough to decide whether a politician is corrupted or is doing a poor job.