It would be foolish to try to formulate one amendment to cover all of the issues that need to be addressed. Not only would it be too complicated and difficult for most people to understand, it would increase the likelihood than nothing would be passed, or if it were to be passed and ratified, could easily be misinterpreted by the Supremes.
It would be much better to have a group of amendments, each covering a single discrete topic. An amendment limiting application of the Commerce clause to actual commerce between the states, and not just applying it to any activity that could possibly tangentially affect such commerce, would be a good one. Repealing the 17 amendment would be another good one. And one prohibiting SCOTUS from recognizing or creating any new "right" not specifically mentioned in the Constitution would be a good one as well.
You need to listen and learn a little before engaging whatever it is you have between your ears.
Start here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3304160/posts
“...one amendment to cover all of the issue vs. a group of amendments...”
-
I argue with myself about this and remain of two minds on that.