Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can handle your first two suggestions but have to wonder just how democratic the third one is. What you want is for Congress to never get us into a war but that is getting increasingly harder to avoid with the actions of our President and his Pentagon.
If you aren't willing to send in your own sons and daughters to war, don't you try to send in mine!
Obviously the founders could not have seen what was coming in the future. Yet they seem open to allowing changes (amendments)in the future. Even if it wasn't popular at that particular moment in time.
Just curious if you could change the constitution, a article or an amendment what would you change?
If you want to add to it what would you add.
Before someone "rages," As we all should know we can't "CHANGE" the constitution, but can add amendments.
If you was a founding father would you do anything different?
Not based on any recent events just thought it would be a interesting discussion.
Allow voting rights for property owners only
restrict voting rights to males only
restrict voting rights if anyone is on public assistence
make illegal immigration a capital crime
make executive orders illegal
budget must be balanced over ten year periods
senate, presidential, and congress term limits four years
Supreme Court terms to eight years
All campaign funds from political races returned to the government after term limit expired
lobbying illegal for life after serving in the presidency, congress, or senate
national right to work amendment
presidential candidates must verify citizenship by independent board two years prior to taking office
I don't mean to be picky but, IMO, there is the Constitution and there are laws. I do not know what, " the Constitution laws" are.
I suggest that the easiest way to cure this confusion is to simply read the constitution. It establishes the foundational laws that define the structure of all three branches of government and their respective relationships and responsibilities; it offers the only authority the federal government has by means of specific delegation of powers; it outlines the lawful procedures required to draft additional laws; etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
Again, what Article and Section?
I thought the President was required by law to present a budget proposal. He is NOT required to utilize OMB but, he would be very unwise NOT to do so. ( I don't think Obama used much of OMBs work when he submitted his proposals)
The President does NOT have to work with the House to come up with a proposal as I assume you wrote. I might be misunderstanding your statement.
Both the House AND the Senate ARE required by law to submit a budget proposals.
A pretty good description of the budget process is here.
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Revenue bills are specifically assigned to the House, and I see no assignment of duty or authority for the president to be involved in the process of submitting revenue proposals to either house of congress ... in fact, his only responsibility is to either sign bills passed by congress, or return the bill to congress, or do nothing, which after 10 days will be as if he signed it.
An important, but often misunderstood fact about the constitution is that is not a limiting document .... it is an empowering document ..... it delegates powers to the various government entities to do something, and if that power is not delegated, that power doesn't exist. Many people have been led to believe that the government can do what ever it wants to do, so long as the constitution doesn't prohibit it ... and that is clearly not the case at all.
This is reaffirmed in the language of the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
YES, for starters I would make strict term limits........you would get ONE term of 4 years in ANY appointed/elected Federal office.........then you are done for LIFE. Then you can go do some other corrupt activity to feed your ego and pocketbook.
I don't mean to be picky but, IMO, there is the Constitution and there are laws. I do not know what, " the Constitution laws" are.
Again, what Article and Section?
I thought the President was required by law to present a budget proposal. He is NOT required to utilize OMB but, he would be very unwise NOT to do so. ( I don't think Obama used much of OMBs work when he submitted his proposals)
The President does NOT have to work with the House to come up with a proposal as I assume you wrote. I might be misunderstanding your statement.
Both the House AND the Senate ARE required by law to submit a budget proposals.
A pretty good description of the budget process is here.
I failed to make that word read Constitutional by leaving out the last two letters of it. Constitutional laws seem to be laws that Obama doesn't care for.
There is a chance that you could understand all of this better if you read only Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution. There you would find that since budgets involve revenue (taxes) they must originate in the House of Representatives. "All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills."
It is that rule of origination that makes the taxation part of the law I call Obamacare unconstitutional since that bill was written in the offices of Harry Reid in the Senate part of the Capitol. Written, I might add by I think 4 Senators and a group of labor leaders and insurance wheels. Not one part of it was debated or even read by the Senate before it was sent to the House for Nancy to do here now famous crap about voting for it so we can find out what is in it. She admitted that the bill had been written somewhere other than in the House with those words.
Maybe you could tell me where you find the part about both houses of Congress writing budget bills since only the House can originate revenue bills. I would be interested in seeing what you have to say about that one. I admitted I was wrong and it is now your turn to put up or "you know".
Article one explains the duties roles and responsibilities of the congress.
Dont need a balanced budget. Just that government cant buy/pay for it if no money.
How to pay for WWI or II? Take everything of value from germany italy and japan and turn them into colonies!
Can you say US Imperialism?
I can say US Imperialism but it means nothing to me. We didn't take all those things from those nations. The European countries did to Germany after WW I but the US didn't allow that kind of crap after WW II.
Maybe the reason I can't believe in your words is because I just don't agree with progressivism.
Darned good post but it seems they ran out of left leaning media people like NYT, WAPO, and a few of those.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
