Just a thought...

There is a lot of talk about Constitutional amendments going around. Today, Mitt Romney signed a pledge to support an amendment that might well be called "lets make it easy and, indeed, a public responsibility, to mess with gays".

That is not what it is called of course, and, I don't believe that the founders even thought of such things or intended such issues to be considered by the government. But I suppose that back then, times were simpler and we did not need protection from the wanton hedonism that stalks us today.

I wish that I had lived back then. Imagine, to put in a days work, go home, sit under a tree or in front of a fire considering the day, then grab a slave and have ones way with them, be they male or female. (Its not the same when you own them you know....).

That is the America we need to restore.

But I digress friends.

Two separate polls released today show that over 80% of the American people think that Congress is not working out so well. (And they say our educational system is failing us...).

I say that they are a shit sandwich, and I would like to be on record as proposing my own amendment to the Constitution, (wording to be worked out), that requires the salaries of every member of the Congress to be published annually, and that the Congress be on the same federal pension system as every other federal employee, and pay into the Social Security and Medicare systems, (such as they are or will be). Any separate system will be phased out beginning one year following ratification, and be eliminated within five years.

All donations, gifts, contributions to members or their candidacies will be published at the same time. Failure to fully disclose these will be a felony and will result in expulsion from the Congress.

No person who has been convicted of a felony shall serve in the United States Congress or Judiciary. Persons convicted of felonies perpetrated while a member of the Congress or the Judiciary shall be subject to an additional penalty of twenty years incarceration in a federal prison plus a forfeiture of assets equal to that of the most severe penalty prescribed under federal law.

How's that?

I have another idea, probably equally unworkable, but I need a drink first...

OK, I'm back.

My other idea represents a thought that seems to be evolving and revolving at the same time. On the one hand, we live in a hands off world, owing in a great many respects to technology, which, at the same time, brings us much closer to a great many things, too close a lot of the time.

I don't know what to think of that. It is a fact of life, it is part and parcel of our lives, for better or worse, but it enables too much outside influence on us without giving us enough power over external things to help channel and balance that influence.

Anyway, before my distracted mind goes off on a tangent, I was thinking that the method of introducing, debating, and passing legislation be modified to be a bit more open and inclusive, this to be accomplished by a Constitutional amendment that would include the following points:

Require a national referendum to be held every other year, (probably at the same time that members of the House are elected), that would allow the introduction of bills into both chambers for a straight-up, roll call vote, without modification.

The vote could allow the passage, or repeal, of legislation under defined circumstances, perhaps subject to overturning by the same two-thirds majority that over-rides a veto by the President, (on a roll call vote, naturally).

Allow each Senator and Representative the right to introduce and bring to a floor, (roll call), vote, one or two bills per session, before being sent to committee for bastardization by lobbyists and other bottom feeders, as well as the privilege of forcing one vote per session. The prerogative needn't be exercised every year by every member, but it might give even the lowest ranked independent a little leverage to be heard and to get a bill to the floor.

(This of course would result in several versions of National Iowa Bullshit Week, but seeing who does what with their privilege has value too...).

I believe that the mandated ten days for the President to sign or veto a bill should be extended to thirty days, (given the size and complexity of some legislation, and the wide range of crap that is tacked on), and that some thought should be given to a line item veto on appropriations bills with an accompanying authority to override that line-item veto with a vote on that item only.

There are a few other things that might be included, but one wants to be more conceptual than detailed in dealing with the Constitution.

Eh? Thats my opinion for the day.

Go ahead, let me have it.