The abuse of power, the lack of respect for our institutions, the rule by edict … can those of us opposed to these create coherent rebuttals in the form of constitutional amendments that will address our time of crisis? What will these amendments say?
The whole thing needs to be written from scratch, taking inspiration from the centuries of improvements made in other countries. Rights should be more clearly defined and not nearly as ambiguous, and we should probably move to a representational parliamentary structure
And at the same time, give the new updated system an end date like say 60 (probably less because things change so quickly) … and after that everything has to be updated and rewritten again.
The problem with forever systems is that we don’t know what things will be like in 50, 60, 100 years from now and whether or not our outdated ideas will hinder future growth or be used and abused to benefit those in power.
Look at modern US laws … I’m sure there are whole chapters devoted to horses and horse carriages that no one uses any more … or maritime laws detailing what should or shouldn’t be done on sailing ships.
Eh… Be careful what you wish for. Chile has been wrestling with a new constitution for… Three years now? Maybe more. It’s not easy and impatience can get people elected who would write something abominable.
Sure you could reuse stuff but politicians don’t usually get elected on doing the same old.
I would rather take the risk of change rather than hold to a past that was responsible for so many terrible things … specifically speaking for Chile.
The president should be stripped of any criminal immunity, and should have no protection from being investigated or charged, even while in office.
Pardon power should be eliminated, or at least severely limited.
Money isn’t speech, campaign finance laws are allowed, buying elections is illegal.
The insurrection clause of the 14th amendment is clarified to be self executing. Insurrection should also be very clearly defined.
Officials in all three branches of government must publicly disclose their finances and either divest from any potential conflicts of interest or put their investments in a blind trust.
Not sure how to address the executive branch ignoring the law and court orders. At some point you have to rely on people actually enforcing the law, and any mechanism you put in place to stop someone like Trump needs to be carefully considered so that it doesn’t just become another weapon to be used by fascists to attack any administrations they oppose.
I would also call out term limits for ALL elected and appointed positions. If we had those for congress and the SCOTUS, the nation might not be falling apart right now.
That their original constitution wasn’t some godly document descended from angelic inspiration, but a haphazard first draft and should have been scrapped and completely rebuilt a century ago.
Which is what every other liberal democracy did because it’s that obvious.
For fucks sake, we literally did that after founding the country and people just forget.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/articles-of-confederation
The founding fathers were so totally not infallible that they themselves said “we messed that one up” within a few years and reworked the whole thing.
They absolutely never even intended it to be a static document. It’s telling that the first published version of it is mostly composed of amendments to the main document. They couldn’t even get out the door without thinking of ten changes that needed to be made.Yep. The sacralization of the US constitution is a later process and a perversion of the entire idea of liberal democracy as theorized then.
Which is why the French, which were doing the same thing at the time, are on their fifth republic and a bunch of them responded to their recent struggles to form a majority by proposing a whole new one to fix the problem.
When I was learning this stuff it was common to present the anglo tradition and the French tradition as the “two successful models” for constitutional democracies (blended with the idea of common law and continental law systems). I would argue that in restrospect that is inaccurate. Or at least that one of those models got exhausted faster than the other.
I read something once that said the worst export American ever had was a strong presidential system. Not sure where I read that or who said it, but it seems apt.
I’m way out of my depth here, but the strong presidential system is a trade-off no? It makes sure rhe country can run even when the legislature is divided and unable/unwilling to make a governing coalition. I mean imagine today’s House of Representatives in a country with a real parliamentary system.
I don’t think you could skip to the end like that. I mean you can’t sit here and take the current House of Representatives and remove it from the United States presidency. It’s way too ingrained and affected to make a good judgment about its abilities independently. I mean honestly how much of the House Representatives right now do you think could be called direct vassals of Donald Trump? How much has the house representative been completely tarnished by how US presidents have behaved in the last century? How much of their power have they surrendered willingly and for political reasons to the presidency? In ways in which the founding fathers never envisioned?
As for presidencies being a trade-off, well the most recent government refusing to form a coalition was caused by a President in France. So clearly that doesn’t help. Legislators refusing to form a government just means they should be replaced. Which is how it’s supposed to work, which is much more responsive to the will of the people really. But it’s not like those governments shut down entirely in the meantime. There’s still an apparatus.
So clearly that doesn’t help. Legislators refusing to form a government just means they should be replaced.
Replaced how? I mean they’re the ones who decide whether they get replaced or not right?
I mean honestly how much of the House Representatives right now do you think could be called direct vassals of Donald Trump? How much has the house representative been completely tarnished by how US presidents have behaved in the last century? How much of their power have they surrendered willingly and for political reasons to the presidency? In ways in which the founding fathers never envisioned?
Fair enough.
Replaced by a new election. If you can’t form a new government new elections are forced. It rarely gets that far, but it’s happened.
Anyone with billions in debt to putin and Saudi Arabia is disqualified from office, anyone with collectively 1,000 or more grams of orange spray paint applied to their face in a year is shot in the fucking face
This was already a rule called the emoluments clause. It was meant to disqualify people who can either be leveraged or manipulated by their business interests.
The only thing that needed to happen for trump to be kept out of power was for 8 more gop senators to have a spine when he was impeached so the senate could convict on the insurrection charges.
My guy. We’re not getting out of this. Project 2025 will all be amendments soon enough…
Stop protecting religion. Solid, titanium wall between State & Religion. We are living in a pre-nazi, pre-soviet state because of the idiocy of religion. Make America Dumb Again
- Abolishment of political parties at the federal level. No more D or R next to their name on the ballot
- First past the post has got to go
- The number of years each Justice is permitted to serve is determined by a D20 die roll. The roll occurs immediately after appointment
- every adult citizen in the country gets a mail-in ballot mailed to them
- government 101 is a required high school course
