The Twenty-Second Amendment - Too late

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Section 2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

 Thank you FDR. After Eight years in office with the new super federal power, enough damage has been done by one person. It is simply too much of a temptation to turn the United States into a personal empire.

Usually when I think of a personal empire I think of a man named Suharto. Actually its something me and Obama have in common, we were both ruled by the same person growing up. He lived in Suharto's Indonesia in 1968 and I live in Suharto's Indonesia in 1998. By the time Suharto resigned he had gained a fortune of about $15 billion dollars and had stacked government positions top to bottom with close friends and members of his family.

Without the Twenty-Second amendment could that have happened in the United States? We would like to think not because we are a democracy, but then again, so is Indonesia. Anything is possible, and the best thing we can do to prevent having an emperor is to set up our government to not be able to support one. The Two-term limit should have been official long before FDR, and FDR should have held himself to it anyway.

The Nineteenth Amendment - Women's Sufferage

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Well, there you have it, now everyone can vote right? Ha, we still have to add in 18, 19, and 20 year old's in to the mix.

Again, I'm a very right wing dude. I see a lot of problems in our society in respect to gender issues and the strength of the family, but really none of these problems conservatives see can possibly stem from giving women the right to vote.

Even if you do make the case that the man's vote was really a vote for the family, you still have to take into account widows and unmarried women, where would there representation come from?

The Eighteenth Amendment - 2nd worst Amendment

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

What were these people thinking??? Look I'm about as conservative right-wing fundamentalist christian as a 25 year old can get, and I see absolutely no reason to ever consider banning alcohol. But in a way, I'm pretty relieved, taking the liberal side of an amendment makes it a lot easier to find videos.

 
Yes, I actually think this makes a point. When people are just forced into not having a substance they have grown accustomed to, they go crazy. Trust me, I have given up smoking, felt a lot like Homer there for a while. However I was quitting for my wife and for my family, if it was some ugly woman and a bunch of idiots in the government telling me to quit I would have been to the nearest smoke-easy for a 50 dollar pack of reds.
"Well Mr. Conservative, if you're so against prohibition, why are you against marijuana." I'm not. I've never touched the stuff, I think it makes you stupid, but it should be legal. Harder drugs should not be legal because they are unquestionably and extremely harmful to the addicts that use them.

 

The Seventeenth Amendment - Worst, Idea, Ever

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

In effect, it means that Senators shifted from being elected by each state's legislature to being voted on by the state as a whole. Sounds great right? Not so right. In fact, I think this is possibly the worst thing to ever happen to the constitution.

This guy brought up some interesting facts I didn't know about, but it all sounds like the government was functioning the way it was supposed to up until 1913. The idea of it all just makes more sense. The House was supposed to decide what the government should do and the Senate would essentially decide if they had the power to do that in the first place.

If you think about it, say you have 10 congressmen. 6 are against recreational marijuana, 4 are for it. 8 of them already have their own state legislature enforcing their own laws. If those 10 congressmen were in the house you would expect them to pass a law banning marijuana. On the other hand if those 10 congressmen were in the senate, who had to pay attention to their states laws, you would expect a majority to want to keep the federal government out of their business.

Another interesting fact is that it is the Senate, not the House, that approves of supreme court justices. Wouldn't it have been wise to re-examine that function of the senate? Especially considering the near unlimited power an activist judge can have (see 10th amendment blog)? Instead what we are left with is a Supreme Court that is more concerned with legislating their opinions than caring about the history of the country and letting people be ruled by their home states.

The Sixteenth Amendment - We're gonna tax ya

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

I'm no expert on the history of the US tax code, but I think that pretty much means the government is going to figure out a way to tax you no matter what. Before the sixteenth amendment there were questions about weather or not an income tax was constitutional. Due to not so unique feelings that the rich were consolidating too much power, the southern and western states ganged up on the north east to pass progressive income taxes.

The question is, what does the federal government do with that money? In comparison, what were the "rich" going to do with that money? The rich typically invest their money in companies, save their money which greatly increases the money supply in an economy, they may hire some people to do things which is always good, or they donate to a charity of their choosing.

The government on the other hand will typically fritter away other people's money in a way that is unaccountable, inefficient, unfair, and will usually have unintended consequences... For example

When the government goes around handing out pell grants and cheap student loans, its good for everyone right? Students get money for tuition and books and ipods, get their education, then go along paying back all that money and become good contributing members of society right? Not so much..

Colleges and Universities are in effect given a price target on tuition. Students are given the money at next to no effort on their own, they generally don't give enough thought to the fact that they are paying $599 per credit hour and the community college down the road is charging $50. In addition, more students are committing a lot of other people's money on degrees that are not really worth it. Sure art history is fun, but is it worth while to go $50,000 in debt for a degree in it? Of course it is when it's not your $50,000.

Private individuals and charities can spot problems like this and target their resources accordingly, doing so in the government is not so easy. And no, I'm not totally ignorant, of course the rich and corporations do illegal and unethical things some times. And of course they should be punished for those things, but forcing them to hand all of their money over to the government is not the answer.

The Fifteenth Amendment - Voting

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation

The Fifteenth was the final "reconstruction amendment" and promised all citizens the right to vote. The ability for blacks to hold office was also included in many versions of the amendment, but even though it didn't make it to the final version many southern legislatures soon started seeing a lot of black state senators and representatives.

However by the 1890's, southern democrats had started instituting poll taxes and literacy tests designed to disenfranchise black voters. This issue was not addressed until much later in our history, and it extended the reign of atrocities against African Americans for generations.

It is interesting how important the right to vote is to people who have had that right violated by their governments. In Iraq and Afghanistan, voters brave suicide bombers and attacks in order to cast a vote for a better tomorrow for their people.

Meanwhile, we in the US are so apathetic about politics, that even when we do vote sometimes we just do so without even making the effort to learn about the issues or the candidates. A zogby poll of Obama voters in 2008 showed that over 50% of them didn't know which party was in control of congress at the time (it was the democrats), but they still turned out to vote out the republicans that were obviously to blame for all the problems of the last two years.

The Fourteenth Amendment - Equality & Reconciliation

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

The fourteenth amendment is another great amendment following the Civil War. It promises citizenship to all born within the jurisdiction of the United States, expelling the Dread Scott ruling that blacks could not be citizens. I can't help but give a little "hell yeah" inside whenever the people come together to write an amendment when the supreme court has failed to make the right decision.

The Amendment also wisely puts a stop to an official caste type system before it began. It would have been all too easy for southerners to just officially label blacks as second class citizens without that. Granted the supreme court still accepted the "separate but equal"doctrine for a time, it was still a very wise step in the right direction.

I picked this cartoon because it brings up an interesting point about the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment does not go into details on the legal status of the parents when the person in question is born. Its another example on how we have taken vague language from an amendment and have been forced to use it out of context. The people who wrote the 14th amendment were not talking about immigration, they were talking about slavery, and they had to pick language accordingly. I personally do not think it is unreasonable to take into account the legal status of the parents when granting the child citizenship.

On the other hand... if we are going to go ahead and apply the 14th Amendment liberally to everything under the sun how the hell does it not apply to the unborn, or at the very least children born alive as the result of a failed abortion? Just this week the Obama administration said they were going to look into a country's LBGT discrimination before handing out foreign aid, but last year when Biden went to China he said he "understood" their one child policy, which leads to millions of abortions and cases of infanticide of girls. Why are some groups so eager to expand the 14th amendment to include open homosexuals, that are not a suspect class and are a group that is arguably better off than average Americans, but deny any rights whatsoever to a child that is unwanted?