Questions to ask our Constitution

I would have signed the Constitution while in the days of the horse and buggy and I would sign it now. But I would sign it now with the knowledge that a few amendments are being made. Questions I have to ask our current Constitution are:

Does having an Electoral College make you happy?

No! I feel like my vote doesn’t really count much with the Electoral College there. Why was it put there anyways? My vote just goes to an Electoral College who is not bound to represent the population of their votes.

The Electoral College votes are the ones that really count anyways. Andrew Jackson (1824), Samuel J. Tilden(1876), Grover Cleveland (1888), and Al “I invented the internet” Gore  (2000) all won the popular vote but lost because of the Electoral College. How is that “by the people”?

Do you support Wyoming having the same number of votes as California, even though they have about 70 times the population?

I don’t. This is terrible procedure and it should be based on population, strictly allowing decisions to be exposed full sway to the American votes. Go away Electoral College!

Do you think that the president has too much power?

Prior to Obama’s Kingdom… ...I mean presidency, my “little man” public eye might have said no. But I’m not so sure now. Though the President, in the past typically acted in the interest of the citizens, he does not now. He should not be able to make political or economic choices of significance without our consent. Excluding national emergencies.

Presidential PowerCredit:

Should lame-duck presidents retain full legal authority to make widely controversial decisions?

I don’t feel they should have full legal authority to do whatever they want. Take away from the President the power to “Veto” what Congress and the House of Reps has stated. Easily, I can stance that the President needs to retain all ‘behind the scenes’ powers. But overall, the President needs less power than he has now. The U.S.A. of “We the People” should be run more by Congress and the House of Reps. This would allow Congress a chance to modify small, limited procedures we didn’t like about the previous presidency and cabinet.

Are you satisfied with a Constitution that, in effect, maximizes the sinister consequences of certain kinds of terrorist attacks on the United States?

Of course these terrorist situations don’t have all their details released to the public, however, in the name of justice I don’t feel that, especially with terrorism, there should not exist the slightest amount of deviation from law.

Guantanamo Bay needs to continue existence but the various types of cruelty administered to the individuals needs to stop. This especially needs tobe removed from the Constitution. (Now no one shoot me but I’m not as firm on a “no torture” position against those who are harming life and withholding information.)

Are you ok with the Supreme Court serving up to 40 years allowing them to dictate their own political preferences?

Absolutely not! This is one of the biggest flaws of the Constitution. Their terms of service and influence need to be bridled. It’s outrageous to think that we have checks and balances set for the terms of service of Congress and the President’s, yet not the Supreme Court Justice.

Is it ok to you that the President of the United State appoints the Supreme Court Justice himself and is not voted in?

This allows him WAY too much power. That position dictates the interpretation of many influential laws that the rest of have to live by. The cliche, "It's not what you know but who you know" should not apply here. Yet he’s not elected in! This is not a “by the people” situation but a “prescribed to the people” situation by our big-brother government.

How does it make you feel that no other country makes it so difficult to amend its constitution?

Though America paved the way in the use of Constitutions, ours is the hardest to amend. Even as even an interested citizen, I have no idea how to amend or even make suggestions for improvement to the constitution. I’m not suggesting amendment to the values, principles, or precious freedoms, which the Constitution promotes, but a closer adherence towards them. 

The 27th Amendment

The 27th Amendment is the most recent one having been ratified in 1992 but its submission happened 203 years earlier!

How would you expect the authors of the Federalist papers to answer them?

I love the constitution and the government it has created for me.  I agree that the founding fathers were inspired to write it and that inspiration can be found all throughout. But good grief, I think that the Founding Fathers would be shocked at some of the things we do with our Constitution now!

I would have signed the Constitution while in the days of the horse and buggy. I would sign it now. But I would sign it now with the knowledge that we would have a few amendments here and there AND the knowledge of HOW to amend is more publicly known. “…we should no longer express our blind devotion to it. It is not,” as Thomas Jefferson properly suggested, “the equivalent of the Ark of the Covenant. It is a human creation open to criticism and even to rejection.” I don’t reject it. It’s from God. Let’s just amend it again by convention.

Should Obama be seen as another George Washington?

Oh, but wait, I shouldn’t be asking these questions. Let me just go back to my Little Man, “you didn’t build that” pheasant ways.

For our posterity and prosperity’s sake, it's time to Amend the Constitution!