Looks like 2/3rds to me!
This Repeal Amendment, which lets the states repeal Federal legislation is a good idea.
Other good amendment ideas… Balanced Budget, Flat Tax, and No Anchor Babies.
Or just have one Big amendment, called the “Fixing stupid ideas from the past Amendment”.
I’d also favor a part-time Congress. And not permitting serial holding of political offices.
I suspect that 80% of the population would like these ideas, and 0% of the political class.
The 14th amendment covers citizenship like this:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
The author of the amendment did not mean to make citizens of children born to foreign citizens currently residing on US soil:
The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
But as with most other things Washington and our courts touch, plain common sense has been corrupted so that now children of illegal aliens become citizens. This is wrong on many fronts, rare in the world (only about 30 countries and hardly any modern Western countries do this), and provides a tempting incentive to break U.S. immigration law.
Those who want to change this talk about tweaking the 14th amendment itself. Good luck with that. There are enough blue states legislatures that want future Democrat voters that this approach will go nowhere. Better, and sufficient, would be to have Congress define who is subject to its jurisdiction for purposes of the 14th Amendment.
Some say that wouldn’t survive a court challenge. I suspect it would face trouble in plaintiff shopped lower courts, but do just fine at the Supreme Court.
We need to do something, and since a Constitutional amendment isn’t feasible, passing a law is the correct next step.
You don’t the half of it lassie.
Slavery is still legal in the US… but only the government can do it. The text of the 13th amendment clearly states this:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation
Read Section 1 again, slower,…. that’s right, slavery is legal if you are convicted of a crime.
What crime is left unspecified. And slavery can’t be cruel and unusual since it is explicitly permitted here.
This seems a bit scary to me. And inexplicably unexploited. I’d have thought that the progressives would have latched onto this as a way to exploit the productive.
Politically it seems unlikely, but with enough fervor about a given crime, passions could overcome sense and we could have slavery again. But hey… I’ll give it a try for a very unpopular crime, just to show how easy it could be if we went down this path…
13th Amendment slavery could be useful as a way to get around the “rights” of sexual predators. Balancing those rights too often reintroduces them into society where they just shouldn’t be. As slaves we could put them where-ever.
There, I just justified slavery. It’s almost too easy!
And apparently, available.
Roger Ebert, film critic, says this (about the Ground Zero Mosque):
The First Amendment comes down to this: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
I’m just picking on Roger because he is the latest I’ve caught saying it. Nor am I going to demand military experience, or even for that matter, know what the hell they are talking about.
What I do wish for, however, is similar concern for all the amendments and rights.
For instance, the 2nd amendment. I’d be happy to have Roger sacrifice for my right to defend myself, but I doubt he is interested.
And I didn’t hear any liberals going on about “defending to the death” property rights in the Kelo eminent domain case. (4th amendment)
Nor are they beating down the doors complaining about how powerful the Federal government is, and how it has usurped, effectively the 10th Amendment.
And those cops that were declared innocent in state court, and then brought up on charges in Federal court. No liberals were screaming about dying for the 5th amendment then.
Here is a tip…. if it is bad for the country, then to a liberal, the Constitution protects it. If it is good for the country, well… we may let you do it, but we will tax it.
If George Bush had investigated a company that sent a flyer to its customers expressing concern about policies he was proposing. Humana, a large insurance company with over a million Medicare Advantage enrollees sent a flyer saying, in part, this:
"While these programs need to be made more efficient, if the proposed funding cut levels become law, millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable," it said.
It urged seniors to sign up with Humana for regular updates on the health care legislation, and encouraged them to contact their lawmakers in Washington.
Ignoring the Constitution the government sent them a cease and desist letter ordering the communications be stopped.
Just imagine!
Hey you Obama supporters… is gutting the 1st amendment the “change” you hoped for?
Hey… lets have more government involved in our health care…. What could go wrong?
Well, how about yet another tale from the UK:
The mother of a 13-year-old girl who became partly paralysed after being given a cervical cancer vaccination says social workers have told her the child may be removed if she (the mother) continues to link her condition with the vaccination.
Says one member of parliament:
Very often care proceedings are used as retaliation by local authorities against ‘uppity’ people who question the system.
I enjoyed my trips to England and I hope to visit again. But I’m certainly don’t want to follow in their political evolutionary footsteps.
Commenter Carl opined a definition of the “general welfare” clause so broad as to essentially gut the entire idea behind the Constitution (a Federal government with limited power).
Claire McCaskill’s held a health care town hall yesterday… and a Tea Party broke out.
This veterans comments were both well spoken and well aimed – at Claire and fellow veteran Commenter Carl:
I wish our local Tea Party group could get there act together and bug Jim Matheson when he returns home. Alas, there big “tada” so far this Congressional recess is an invite to a Patrick Henry Caucus fundraiser. I fear Republicans have preempted our local Tea Party. Sigh.
H/T: Gateway Pundit
Pull out your pocket Constitution, or check it online.
Where, exactly, does it permit the Federal Government to force a minimum wage on the entire nation?
Here… let me help you. Take a peek at the 10th amendment:
Amendment 10 – Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Basically, if something isn’t specified as something permitted to the Federal Government, it is reserved to the states.
Isn’t it bad enough that the minimum wage kills jobs? Why must we violate the Constitution to do it? And where, exactly, are the heads of the Supreme Court justices that say something like this is Constitutional?
Why should I believe any other thing they claim is or isn’t Constitutional?
Come on guys, somebody is sharing their Internet
The FCC claims it can search your house without a warrant if you “radiate”, like for instance a cell phone, wireless router, or cordless phone:
Anything using RF energy — we have the right to inspect it to make sure it is not causing interference," says FCC spokesman David Fiske. That includes devices like Wi-Fi routers that use unlicensed spectrum, Fiske says.
Sounds “reasonable” until you remember that once in the house, they can arrest you for anything they see looking for where you are hiding your radiating devices.
BAD IDEA!