Like your idea(s) except for:
Tax S1: ‘wages’ best be spelled out. They’d call ‘em any other name just to get around the rule.
S2: nullification has always been the purview of We the People, why spell it out again?
S5: Why 10%? Why not 3? States must already balance their books, the Fed. is operating extra-Const. as it is
S7: Ex post facto is already unlawful, no?
S10: No benefits should be given to the same in the FIRST place (to be rescinded)
F.R.Act
S1-2: Coinage act already lays this out?
S6: Only 2x? Make it HURT financially, they should also be jailed.
S7: Unnecessary if they followed A1S8, but I guess why this is needed :P
C.C.A
S1: We have green subsidies already that fall into this category. There should be NO give-aways of taxpayer funds for ANY reason
S3: ‘, or circumvent any Right(s)’
Think you left one out though:
- NO ONE’s taxes shall be less than 1%. There is no services that are FREE for any Citizen.
- All votes/delegates tallied by districts, NOT by tally of votes (no longer let the cities over-rule the rest of the State/Country)
- Voting shall be done on the same day for all States, and directly after (if any) tax payments are made (no more can 5 States delegate the runners and people will know how much their vote is costing)
- Equality of Law (if the rules pertain to XYZ, it shall pertain to gov’t as well).
Damn, I’d fill up the NSA servers with the rest :P
Thank you.
except for: Tax S1: ‘wages’ best be spelled out. They’d call ‘em any other name just to get around the rule.
S2: nullification has always been the purview of We the People, why spell it out again?
S5: Why 10%? Why not 3? States must already balance their books, the Fed. is operating extra-Const. as it is
S7: Ex post facto is already unlawful, no?
S10: No benefits should be given to the same in the FIRST place (to be rescinded)
S1, 'Wages' by the dictionary-term is imminently understandable to anyone: what is received for work done, so I understand what you're saying but I disagree that it's needed because the Constitution is written by the common-people for the government. Therefore their own common understanding and language should be sufficient, instead of the specialized jargon of the legal profession where 'let' means 'prevent'.
S2, I put nullification in there so as to make it impossible for the Judiciary to hide the concept from jurors as they are currently wont to do. Moreover, giving it specificity like this means that government cannot pile on fees/fines/taxes and strip you of your livelihood without appealing to your peers, this should reduce the arbitrariness thereof.
S5: 10% because it's a nice easy-to-remember/calculate number.
S7, the courts have ruled that there cannot be civil ex post facto law, as the increase of severity of punishment is the necessary ingredient
. This has been exploited as Congress has retroactively changed tax law before, and yet tax-law violations are considered a criminal affair — so this solves the incongruity therein by speciffically forbidding any tax/fine from being ex post facto.
S10, No, I think that there should be reward given for work done (that is wages). As it is now, there's a lot of people who are going to be getting a good retirement package (or think they are) such as judges: this will make the violation of this amendment really hurt those enacting the violation.
F.R.Act
S1-2: Coinage act already lays this out?
S6: Only 2x? Make it HURT financially, they should also be jailed.
S7: Unnecessary if they followed A1S8, but I guess why this is needed :P
The Congress has power to [fairly] easily alter the coinage act, but even so the Federal Reserve is the big culprit in spending; this would leave things fixed and out of [normal] reach for the congress. S6: I did not want it to be unjust, 2x [plus legal expense] sounds good to me; we don't want to impose punishments that can never be fulfilled. S7, tightens things up a bit: it forbids the FedGov from imposing unfunded liabilities
upon the States.
C.C.A
S1: We have green subsidies already that fall into this category. There should be NO give-aways of taxpayer funds for ANY reason
S3: ‘, or circumvent any Right(s)’
Even if Green
-crap does fit into the promotion of science/useful-arts, to prohibit it altogether would mean no congressional funding for things like, say, DARPA (which gave us the internet). S3, good addition… except I think that it might be used on things that aren't really rights (abortion).
Think you left one out though:
- NO ONE’s taxes shall be less than 1%. There is no services that are FREE for any Citizen.
Nope, that's in Section 6 of the Tax Reform Amendment.
- All votes/delegates tallied by districts, NOT by tally of votes (no longer let the cities over-rule the rest of the State/Country)
Hm, interesting idea... but I don't think it really fits into the amendments I've shown.
- Voting shall be done on the same day for all States, and directly after (if any) tax payments are made (no more can 5 States delegate the runners and people will know how much their vote is costing)
You mean for primaries?
- Equality of Law (if the rules pertain to XYZ, it shall pertain to gov’t as well).
Yeah, that would be a good one.