Freep this poll

http://www.morrowcounty.net/ ^

[sparkomatic]

1) If you were in charge of writing a whole new Constitution for America, what would it say?

Nothing different than the current one says 6 60.00%
A few minor changes 2 20.00%
It wouldn't even be recognizable! 2 20.00%

[jec41]

How many of our troubles today stem from that stain upon our nation?

I don't know. In 64 years I never met a slave, never talked to a slave, and never knew anyone who owned a slave.
I have never seen anyone that had starved to death lying on the street nor have I seen anyone hanged or tared and feathered. I have seen some racial hate crimes but under todays laws I think most are caught and punished. Also I have observed that racial hate crimes are committed by all races and in general are a way of blaming someone else for their under achievement. I feel neither guilt nor shame or responsible for someones else's actions that were committed before my generation was born. I a responsible for my own actions and do not feel that I have any stain what so ever.

[bigLusr]

I love most of what you've said. But I think that by allowing Congress to overturn the SC you'd just transfer the runaway branch from the judicial to the legislative. Essentially you'd let them get away with passing anything, no matter how Unconstitutional, as long as they had 2/3 support two years running.

[Dead Corpse]

I'd make purposing any legislation, executive order, or judicial activism, that runs contrary to the plain wording of the Constitution punishable the same as treason.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Well, that's not much different than what they do now, of course. But at least, you'd have the possibility of voting the bums out as opposed to the judiciary. You have to leave the judiciary as lifetime appointments to try to isolate them from political games as much as possible but restore the intent to make them subservient to the legislature (witness what happened with direct election of Senators, as opposed to selection by state legislatures - a twofold effect of greatly lessening the role of the states in determining federal policy as well as turning great statesmen into political hacks). Alternatively, you could just prevent them from having the power they usurped in the first place via Madison v. Marbury of deciding Constitutionality.

[bigLusr]

No. Judges would only play political games if they could run for re-election. Make it simple - one term (10 years?) then you're out of the game forever.

And ... yeah, in many MANY ways we'd be better off w/out Marbury v. Madison... but ultimately I think it's necessary (to prevent a runaway legislature)... and the historical record suggests that the framers overwhelmingly approved of judicial review...

[bigLusr]

Oh. And I don't trust the people to "vote the bums out" if the unconstitutional laws they pass are popular.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Yes, which is why I didn't add it but specifically stated that Congress could overturn an obvious misrule (e.g. Pledge of Allegiance comes to mind). By making it take two sessions (which some states do for amendments to their Constitution) makes it hard enough to do that it just wouldn't be an example of Congressional pique at being overruled.