What Amendment would you support.

[RetiredGySgt]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

 

[The Infidel]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

yes yes and yes..... but it seems like a can of worms, messing with it.

 

[uscitizen]

A pure flat income tax with no deductions.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

yes yes and yes..... but it seems like a can of worms, messing with it.

The Congress not the President is responsible for Legislation allowing an amendment for a line item veto would destroy the given power of Congress and transfer to the President to much power. By picking and choosing what lines to remove a President can totally change the intent and purpose of a bill.

My opposition to a term limit is that the PEOPLE already have that power. If they are to stupid to exercise it why demand the Government protect themselves from themselves?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A pure flat income tax with no deductions.

That doesn't require an amendment. Further one could read the Constitution as opposing the tiered system though we now have almost 100 years of precedence to protect it.

 

[The Infidel]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

yes yes and yes..... but it seems like a can of worms, messing with it.

The Congress not the President is responsible for Legislation allowing an amendment for a line item veto would destroy the given power of Congress and transfer to the President to much power. By picking and choosing what lines to remove a President can totally change the intent and purpose of a bill.

My opposition to a term limit is that the PEOPLE already have that power. If they are to stupid to exercise it why demand the Government protect themselves from themselves?

Hey.... stop trying to make me think.


Im tired!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

They’re all bad ideas, the first in particular. As noted, don’t destroy the Constitution because the people are too lazy or stupid to do their job.

The only amendment I’d support would be a single six-year term for the president. Every president since 1951 is in re-election mode for the first four years, to the great detriment of the Nation; and if re-elected an ineffective lame duck the second term, also to the detriment of the Nation.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

They’re all bad ideas, the first in particular. As noted, don’t destroy the Constitution because the people are too lazy or stupid to do their job.

The only amendment I’d support would be a single six-year term for the president. Every president since 1951 is in re-election mode for the first four years, to the great detriment of the Nation; and if re-elected an ineffective lame duck the second term, also to the detriment of the Nation.

I personally would repel the term limits for President. If the people are dumb enough to want to keep reelecting the same person to President, that is the people's business.

Now I would support an age limit. No one over 80 can elected to any Federal Office.

 

[zzzz]

I think the best solution would be to call for a Constitutional convention. And to that end the delegates would have to be comprised of citizens who hold no Federal office. A convention would allow the people to amend the Constitution and by eliminating the Federal politicians maybe we can eliminate the special interests influence on the process. Look at what can be done.
Right to firearms can be spelled out.
Citizenship can be defined specifically.
Balanced Budget requirements
War powers can be defined.
and others.

Do it all at the same time just like the original Constitution was done.

 

[code1211]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

The Balanced Budget Amendment, however, to be somewhat effective, it should include the line item Veto.

As far as leaving room for emergency expenditures, it should also include a plan to reduce and eliminate the debt and in about a million years to start a savings program.

Any excess over the tax revenues would need some ridiculous majority. 75% from each House and the Presidential approval.

 

[code1211]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

Just curious?

I am opposed to the second and third. The first would have to allow for some debt in order for the Government to work and would defeat the purpose.

yes yes and yes..... but it seems like a can of worms, messing with it.

The Congress not the President is responsible for Legislation allowing an amendment for a line item veto would destroy the given power of Congress and transfer to the President to much power. By picking and choosing what lines to remove a President can totally change the intent and purpose of a bill.My opposition to a term limit is that the PEOPLE already have that power. If they are to stupid to exercise it why demand the Government protect themselves from themselves?

The current appropriations methodology is to include everything uder one bill so its shut down government or approve funding for abortion.

Maybe the Congress would finally have to segment their wishes and force honest votes on particular funding issues.

 

[code1211]

Balanced Budget Amendment?

Term limits for Congress Amendment?

Line Item Veto for President Amendment?

They’re all bad ideas, the first in particular. As noted, don’t destroy the Constitution because the people are too lazy or stupid to do their job.

The only amendment I’d support would be a single six-year term for the president. Every president since 1951 is in re-election mode for the first four years, to the great detriment of the Nation; and if re-elected an ineffective lame duck the second term, also to the detriment of the Nation.

You'd prefer a lame duck from the outset?

 

[Sallow]

None of the above.

I'd like to see the Electoral College go bye bye..and an Explicit amendment detailing the Right to Privacy. The government should not be able to spy on citizens without good cause.

 

[code1211]

I think the best solution would be to call for a Constitutional convention. And to that end the delegates would have to be comprised of citizens who hold no Federal office. A convention would allow the people to amend the Constitution and by eliminating the Federal politicians maybe we can eliminate the special interests influence on the process. Look at what can be done.
Right to firearms can be spelled out.
Citizenship can be defined specifically.
Balanced Budget requirements
War powers can be defined.
and others.

Do it all at the same time just like the original Constitution was done.

All of those things are spelled out.

Weak enforcement is the problem here.

 

[code1211]

None of the above.

I'd like to see the Electoral College go bye bye..and an Explicit amendment detailing the Right to Privacy. The government should not be able to spy on citizens without good cause.

To be replaced by what?

 

[editec]

Balanced budget amendment?

Given how the government seems to piss away money that is a tempting law, isn't it?


But suppose some European dicatator wanted to sell a bit of land that would double the USA for a pittance? The USA could not have borrowed the money from an Engish bank to pick up this bauble, could it have?

That would have been a shame, wouldn't it?

The USA's Western border would be the Mississippi river.

Suppose the USA found itself in a deep depression butwas threatened by an evil cabal of other nations?

What if the USA couldn't borrow enough money to go to war? What would have happened?

Maybe the problem isn't that our government can borrow money, maybe the problem is that our recent governments have been run by people who were not truly looking out for the interests of this nation as a whole?

What I am suggesting to you is that we don't need governments that are limited by laws(because thise limits make the government impotent), so much as we need governments that are run by people who aren't bought and paid for by special interests.


And incidently, when those special interests are BANSTERS, then it ought not surprise us that the USA has a LOT of debt.

It is in THEIR interests (but not necessarily the nation's as a whole) to see to it that the USA debt cycle continues

 

[turtledude]

I would repeal the 16th and 17th amendments and suggest amendments that

1) require any laws passed by congress to apply equally to congress

2) prevent the majority from raising the tax rate on a minority. THus only a consumption or flat tax would be legal

 

[Jackson]

A pure flat income tax with no deductions.

Charitable donations should be allowed and funding for religious institutions eliminated. Same for the Ednowment of the Arts.

We need the rich to fund their causes, not the tax payers. I want to pick where my donations go.

We could have term limits if we exercised our mind and rights to vote out the incompetence.

Great Turtle, about ALL laws applying to Congress. What common sense!

The current appropriations methodology is to include everything uder one bill so its shut down government or approve funding for abortion.

Maybe the Congress would finally have to segment their wishes and force honest votes on particular funding issues - Good Code1211!

A balanced budget!

 

[konradv]

The amendment I'd like to see would eliminate any private finacing of elections. All election activities would be publically financed to eliminate the need for our representitives to auction their votes to the highest bidder.

 

[Dragon]

1) Money is not speech.
2) A corporation is not a person.