Posted on 01/07/2010 6:42:19 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
PALM CITY, Fla., Jan. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- A national effort to add ten specific amendments to the Constitution of the United States was launched this week when the nation's 7,300 state legislators received the book "10 Amendments for Freedom" along with information on how to convene a Constitutional Convention.
The effort is being spearheaded by 10 Amendments for Freedom, Inc., a not-for-profit organization, to provide permanent restraints upon the federal government.
"The initial goal is to have the state legislatures vote to have Congress convene a Constitutional Convention to propose ten specific amendments be added to the Constitution," stated William H. Fruth, Founder and National Director. "After the amendments are proposed by the convention, they will need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states."
The proposed Constitutional amendments include the following topics:
"The Constitutional Convention will be the most important political event held in 200 years," Fruth continued. "It will reaffirm the belief the American people have in individual liberty and freedom and that government is created to serve the people, not control their lives."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Touche’ LOL,,,, and ya know, as i wrote that, i pondered that yeah, amendments can’t be ruled unconstitutional. Then i remembered campaign fiance reform, making christmas trees illegal, cities that outlaw entire classes of guns, the war on drugs forfeiture laws, the right to a speedy trial, double jeopardy, healthcare forcing me to buy a product i don’t want, numerous rights of the states, involuntary servitude via national service, etc,,,,
They are already doing the mexican hat dance on the 1st 10. And i sit here smuggly, saying an Amendment can’t be ruled unconstitutional. Shows you how bright i am in reality, huh??
Severely limit the ability of congress to create or raise taxes without a supermajority (say 3/4) except in time of war.
I would also propose the following to eliminate unfunded mandates:
"The federal government of the United States, being a creature of the states and the people, may not require the expenditure of funds for any purpose except that it provide all necessary funds. All prior unfunded spending requirements are null and void except that the federal government provide the funds for expenditure."
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
NO!
Milton Friedman proposed a Constituitional Amendment that would only allow the Government to incur debt during a declared war such as World War II.
Many state governments have no legal authority to incur debt, e. g., Pennsylvannia, New York, Massachusetts. Pennsylvannia actually repudiated its debt once and people and institutions still hold worthless Pennsylvannia bonds. States get around this restriction by setting up “independent authorities” who issue revenue bonds (Pennsylvannia Turnpike, Massachusetts Turnpike, Port of New York.) New York has egregiously abused this work around by having, for instance, the state dormitory authority, set up to build the State University system, take over the prisons, issues bonds backed by the income derived from leasing the prisons back to the State. Oy! Makes Bernie Madoff look ethical.
Term limits should also apply to all members of of the federal judiciary including the supreme court to terms of 12 years or less. Life time appointments make no sense in today’s longer living population.
Simply shows what you can learn by listening to a wise Latina. Orwell would understand.
This is non specific. Constitutional mandates need to be very precisely worded to prevent abuse. Even with that, they still abuse them. The second amendment is a perfect example of weasels twisting words to mean other than what they say.
The U.S. constitution needs two amendments.
First, “No government entity may regulate commerce between the states. If an act violates the laws of one state, but not the state where the act originated, the state where the violation occurred may extradite and pursue legal remedy for such act.”
No more federal alphabet soup.
Second, “Rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court may be reversed or vacated by an act of the legislative and executive branches. If the act is not passed by a 2/3 majority in both houses, and signed by the president within thirty days of the announcement of the ruling, then the Court’s ruling shall stand. The thrity days shall begin on the first day the legislature convenes if it is not in session when the Court’s decision is read.”
The Supreme Court was never intended to have godlike authority.
If I could have a fantasy third amendment, then legislative districts would have no more than 100,000 people. Each state gets six senators and one is elected each year. This reduces the power of each individual legislator. It also makes them accessible. Representatives have a legitimate complaint that campaigning and fund raising consume much of their time. Constituents have a legitimate complaint that they have no access to their representative. Less time and money are needed to reach the voters in a smaller district. Smaller districts also reduce the opportunity for gerrymandering. A smaller district makes it more difficult to pack the district to ensure re-election of the incumbent. It also means the legislator faces competition from people who will go to the schools and supermarkets and personally know the people, not the lobbyists, who want his vote.
Further, it also means that Congress will get less done, as it will take more effort to ensure a successful vote. I think we will all be better off if Congress does less, but they’ll never surrender their power.
There seems to be no mechanism to do this (other than exorcising our 2nd Amendment rights) otherwise one of the 100 quadrillion scum sucking lawyers we have in this country would have tripped over it and sued.
Post #3 has a good point. A Constitutional convention means all is on the table and the left is better at ramming through what it wants. Some very important Amendments such as free speech, right to bare arms and private property could be left out.
Nothing but a Trojan Horse. Here we want to make the Constitution better lets have a convention. When the convention is under way they can nullify the current Constitution, then where will we be?????
Congress shall follow the Constitution as written. For interpretation see: Federalist Papers.
SS should sunset with the 50 year debt elimination provision. My point is that no one should be able to vote on his own benefit. People should be allowed to determine and provide for their retirement.
OK, but since Congress, the courts, and all federal, State, and local government agencies including law enforcement have completely ignored the current Constitution, what’s there to say they will follow anything new in it?
The corruption is too far gone, the bribery a matter of routine “campaign contributions”, and, frankly, they really don’t give a sh*t what you think of their ignoring the Constitution. Hell, they are writing bribery right into the health care bill! In your face! Blatantly! What are you going to do about that?!
While I agree that an actual CC would be a mistake, the threat of having one could spur Congress to act. Some of the current amendments only happened because of the threat of a CC.
No matter how justified a reason is for a convention, care must be taken not to open pandoras’ box. A constitutional convention has an unlimited agenda...the whole thing is open to all comers, and the World has its liberals and totalitarians to funnel supranational agendas into the process to compete with the original intended purpose.
Yes. This is a terrible idea.
The ConCon will be the end of the Republic as we know it. The left will seize control of it and, regardless of why it is conveined, will use it to overthrown our republic and eviscerate our Bill of Rights. Starting with the hated second ammendment.
Travis McGee’s excellent novel series: “Enemies Foreign and Domestic” is very specific about how this could be done.
A far better plan is to
1) Elect a conservative GOP Senate in 2010 and 2012
2) Elect a real conservative to replace Zero in 2012
3) Appoint more conservatives to the SC and
4) in time toss FDR’s unconstitutional Socialist reforms (including SSI).
And, of course, using the other mechanism to ammend the Constitution is great. That mechanism does not lend itself to mischeif making like the ConCon does.
The ConCon is the Alinkyite dream!!
How to Sunset Social Security, fairly.
Here, in my opinion, is the fairest method:
All SSI recipients have their total contributions (including employer match) calculated. Interest is applied using the rate of the 30 year T-bill, and is compounded.
For people who have not yet started collecting SSI this amount is sent to them in a check. This money can either be saved tax free, invested tax free, gifted tax free or willed tax free. It can be converted to an annuity, the proceeds of which are tax free.
Survivors recieve 100% of the contributions + interest of their spouse or parent, in the case where the contributor has passed away.
For people who have started collecting (or perhaps are within some small window of being able to, like over 60) they can either continue to receive benefits or take a one time disbursment based on the above formula, less money taken out.
People who collect from the system without ever having made a significant contribution (the ‘disabled’) are moved to state welfare or other welfare program.
(The combining of working people retirement system with a highly-abused ‘disabled’ program is perhaps the very worst feature of the horrible SSI program.)
To me this is fair, because it gives people what they earned. Nothing less, and nothing more.
The absurd gaming of the system would stop. The ability of politicians to reward and punish based on things like marraige (mostly a negative at this point, you are better off being in a gay relationship) stops.
12. No one receiving money from any government entity shall have a vote, except, members of the military.
So, anyone receiving Social Security retirement benefits, such as your parents may be doing, would not have the right to vote anymore. You may want to rethink your #12.... and while you are doing that, go tell your parents, aunts and uncles, that you want to take away their right to vote.... ha...
Here is the background of the individual mentioned in the article. He is either a knowing Soros shill, a useful idiot, or just incredibly misguided. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and say the latter.
William H. Fruth
William H. Fruth is the President of POLICOM Corporation, an independent economics research firm located in Palm City, Florida, which specializes in studying the dynamics of local economies.
He has personally evaluated the data for more than 600 local economies in the United States, created more than 150 economic and community studies, and, since 1998, has provided presentations and workshops for state-national associations and community forums in 33 states.
Through his analysis, he determines if an economy is growing or declining, what is causing this to happen, and offers solutions to improve or maintain the situation.
He is a nationally recognized leader in the field of geographic economics and also has extensive experience in economic development.
From 1988 to 1995, Fruth served as Vice President of a major industrial land development company directing the development and marketing of a 500-acre corporate park in the West Palm Beach, Florida area.
Prior to that, he was President of the Business Development Board of Palm Beach County, the economic development organization for the area. During that tenure was named Florida’s Economic Development Professional of the Year in 1987.
From 1980 to 1984, Bill served in a full time capacity as Mayor of Tiffin, Ohio. During this time, he was named one of the “Five Outstanding Young Men in Ohio” and was heavily involved in economic and community development locally and statewide.
Fruth has been recognized by the Florida Administrative Court as an expert witness regarding local economies and is a member of the American Institute for Economic Research and the American Economic Association.
Additionally, he is member of the International Economic Development Council, Florida Economic Development Council, and the Southern Economic Development Council.
Fruth received the Bachelor of Science and Master of Arts degrees from Bowling Green State University in Ohio studying political theory, communications, and journalism.
A video of a sample presentation is available upon request.
There are two classes of Social Security recipients. The first, and largest, class are those who are using it as a retirement system. As such they are not all recipients of “government money”. The government has acted as a trustee, and is simply repaying them their own money, or the benefits they are entitled to.
The problem comes with the ever increasing ranks of the “disabled” who fill the SSI roles. A younger black man, about 45, that I know had a pacemaker installed recently. He is in the process of getting SSI disability. Is he disabled? No, not really. I saw him at a bar recently having a vodka and cranberry juice. Does he have any real job prospects at age 45? None that suit him. So with his excuse in hand, some sympathetic doctors, lawyers and social workers I have little doubt he will soon be a ward of the state.
Again, in my opinion, one of the first things that must be done to fix SSI is to seperate out the various classes of peole using the program. It may be that society wishes to provide for the legitimately disabled. It is a bad idea to mix such a program with a contribution based retirement system.
(But again, the goal of the welfare class is not merely to survive with out working, it is to suffer no sanction, embarrasment of differentiation for doing so.)
For the same reason the “Earned Income Tax Credit” is the most offensive welfare program that the Democrats have yet instituted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.