If the Constitution were yours to change...

[Darkwind]

What did you not understand? FECA requires anyone that wants to spend money to talk about elections to form a corporation. This is intended to make it easier to track the finances and spending of people who have political opinions. You cannot require that, and then tell them that they cannot talk about elections and/or candidates. That makes your position absurd.

I don't care about corporations talking about elections, I don't want them making campaign donations.

So you oppose the right of assembly and the redress of grievances...

What you object to is that they can donate more than your groups can donate.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I think it would be a good idea to also give the states the power to impeach with 2/3rds. Why not?

The senate will still have to convict. This would strengthen the states even more!

 

[S.J.]

Anyone running for office should have to provide proof of citizenship. This would keep foreigners like Obama from weaseling their way into our government.

 

[FA_Q2]

In order to vote, you should have to prove your citizenship, plus name both of your U.S. Senators, your House Representative, your Governor, the VP, what each of their roles are, and accurately state what the role is of each of the three branches of government. Anyone who doesn't know these things should not be voting.

The thread topic is about changing the Constitution, not destroying it.

And how would having a voting populous that actually understood the bare bones basics of the government they are voting on destroy the constitution?

Do informed voters scare you?

 

[rightwinger]

In order to vote, you should have to prove your citizenship, plus name both of your U.S. Senators, your House Representative, your Governor, the VP, what each of their roles are, and accurately state what the role is of each of the three branches of government. Anyone who doesn't know these things should not be voting.

The thread topic is about changing the Constitution, not destroying it.

And how would having a voting populous that actually understood the bare bones basics of the government they are voting on destroy the constitution?

Do informed voters scare you?

Elected officials represent EVERYONE. Everyone understands their own needs from government. Why would understanding the dynamics of government help you understand what you want from your representative?

 

[Billo_Really]

So you oppose the right of assembly and the redress of grievances...

What you object to is that they can donate more than your groups can donate.

Corporations have nothing to do with the right of assembly and the redress of grievances. In fact, it is the exact opposite of what you claimed. It is corporations that oppose the right of assembly and the redress of grievances. All one has to do, is look at the crackdown of the "Occupy" movement last year to see that.

 

[FA_Q2]

The thread topic is about changing the Constitution, not destroying it.

And how would having a voting populous that actually understood the bare bones basics of the government they are voting on destroy the constitution?

Do informed voters scare you?

Elected officials represent EVERYONE. Everyone understands their own needs from government. Why would understanding the dynamics of government help you understand what you want from your representative?

It would help greatly because there are specific powers that each rep can deliver.

The reality is that the problems we face today have a LOT to do with a voting public that is utterly ignorant. Candidates today are boiled down to basic pictures and 5 second clips of inane meaningless jargon. People on average simply do not invest the time to even identify government basics. How can you responsibly vote for a congressman if you do not know what a congressman even does? That skillset is quite different than, say, governor. The reality is that you can’t.

 

[Conservadude]

What changes, if any, would you make to it?

Nowadays they don't change it.. They just ignore it.

 

[longknife]

For those eternally demonizing corporations, here's what they REALLY are:

cor·po·ra·tion
[kawr-puh-rey-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1.
an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members. See also municipal corporation, public corporation.
2.
( initial capital letter ) the group of principal officials of a borough or other municipal division in England.
3.
any group of persons united or regarded as united in one body.
4.
Informal. a paunch; potbelly.
Origin:
1400&#8211;50; late Middle English < Late Latin corpor&#257;ti&#333;n- (stem of corpor&#257;ti&#333; ) &#8216;guild&#8217;, Latin: &#8216;physical makeup, build&#8217;.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Once statesmen became career politicians, we lost our representation in the US Capitol.
it isn't corporate money or lobbyists...
It's the perks, great pay, pension, people kissing their ass, the near royal treatment, the glad handing, people offering things they shouldn't...
The idea of serving went like this. You were elected. You served a term or two. Then you went home. Legislative sessions were very short. The idea was to make sure the House members and Senators were home answering to their constituents. There were the issues with travel obviously.
If you really want special interest money out of the process, demand term limits.

What I want is for elected officials to be prevented from becoming lobbiests at least 10 years after they leave office.

Agree with that 100%!!!!
In fact unless they are on a tour with the general public, they should be banned from the buildings.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What changes, if any, would you make to it?

Nowadays they don't change it.. They just ignore it.

Changes:
It should end with:

In sum, the above Constitution is obviously intended to make big government liberalism illegal on these shores. Don't ever forget it!.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What did you not understand? FECA requires anyone that wants to spend money to talk about elections to form a corporation. This is intended to make it easier to track the finances and spending of people who have political opinions. You cannot require that, and then tell them that they cannot talk about elections and/or candidates. That makes your position absurd.

I don't care about corporations talking about elections, I don't want them making campaign donations.

They can't.

Feel better now?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I don't care about corporations talking about elections, I don't want them making campaign donations.

1) they make all donations in effect to Democrats since Democrats are the ones who want government so powerful that it is worth buying off

2) in reality they donate to each party equally so as not to piss half their customers off. Ever notice how they withdraw sponsorship from a TV show the minute any controversy arises?? Can you figure out why?

 

[Billo_Really]

1) they make all donations in effect to Democrats since Democrats are the ones who want government so powerful that it is worth buying off

2) in reality they donate to each party equally so as not to piss half their customers off. Ever notice how they withdraw sponsorship from a TV show the minute any controversy arises?? Can you figure out why?

I want to take them out of the loop completely.

I don't want corporations involved in politics any way, shape or form.

 

[Billo_Really]

Agree with that 100%!!!!
In fact unless they are on a tour with the general public, they should be banned from the buildings.

Just the federal ones.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I don't want corporations involved in politics any way, shape or form.

why?? we should all love corporations since they got us from the stone age to here through capitalist competition!
they are like the air we breath

 

[Billo_Really]

why?? we should all love corporations since they got us from the stone age to here through capitalist competition!
they are like the air we breath

Corporations are the most fascist entity on the planet and none of them have ever pledged an allegience to the United States.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Corporations are the most fascist entity on the planet

obviously they cant be fascist since the are not a single government with control over us. THere are millions of them and they survive only by pleasing us, thats the opposite of fascism.

As a liberal you will lack the IQ to grasp the concept

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

none of them have ever pledged an allegience to the United States.

so??? they exist to to please and serve their customers, not nations. If they fail we immediately send them into bankruptcy!! Again the opposite of fascism but you lack the IQ as a liberal to know it.

 

[Billo_Really]

obviously they cant be fascist since the are not a single government with control over us. THere are millions of them and they survive only by pleasing us, thats the opposite of fascism.

As a liberal you will lack the IQ to grasp the concept

When was the last time you spoke your mind to the corporate brass?

Fascist corporatism

Fascism's theory of economic corporatism involved management of sectors of the economy by government or privately controlled organizations (corporations). Each trade union or employer corporation would, theoretically, represent its professional concerns, especially by negotiation of labour contracts and the like. This method, it was theorized, could result in harmony amongst social classes. Authors have noted, however, that de facto economic corporatism was also used to reduce opposition and reward political loyalty.