What we have here is two factors: the law of diminishing returns (more pages less equity, more complexity more loop holes and catches less) and like our aging gunslinger less able to deal with the reality of today. The American Constitution (and any other aging Constitution for that matter) is a marvel of literature and intent but it was created in a context and a time for an outdated situation. King George no longer reigns England, the threat of invasion that would necessitate everyman bearing arms and well trained militias are all obsolete. The international situation is very different even business is very different today to the point whereby the founding fathers couldn’t have conceived of the Corporate Conglomerates that dominate today.
It is a matter of bewilderment to me that a country, so rightfully proud of its founding ideals (You the People) tolerates such a fundamental diversion, sublimation of the Constitution’s foremost important defining statement? Perversely many Americans cling desperately to the ones that are obsolete like bearing arms. For what? So that they can shoot animals as “Sport”? Now if the animals could shoot back. I wonder how many sportsmen would join up for a two way gun range? Or they attacked animals with the same weapons as the animal ok give them a ‘hunting’ knife to hunt with. Lets see the ‘real men hunt bears etc then.
Next there’s the vehement and even more dubious unsustantiatable) claim of defence, against what? Both the empirical proof and logic is sorely lacking….if it exists at all. My point is that pleasure (?), fear, national paranoia amendments get the shrill, hysterical do or die defence that should be in order for the unique declaration of individuality in the American but nowhere else with such prominence “We the People”. In truth the system is broken stolen by those who believe they have the right to rule, not all that differently to Charles the 1st with his assumed ‘Divine right of Kings’.
Now-a-days there is a conviction that ruling the US is the province of the wealthy or dynasties neither are immune to failings/shortcomings of any regal group. As the British Monarchy has had its imbeciles and incompetents so too has the US had its monumental duds. Conservatism in politics came to be as a means of giving the masses and the merchant class the illusion of some say while maintaining Status Quo in reality. As the ‘upper’ class began to lose financial dominance the corporates took over meanwhile the public remain as always subservient to their ‘betters’ in other words serfs by another name.
In this way Presidents that are all but bought and paid for or so hobbled by their parties that have their own power grabbing agendas and business whose concerns clearly aren’t that of the country. I think everyone reading this will have at hand a cornucopia of issues where the Government is MIA and favours any thing but “We the People.” Under the current flawed system(s) democracy has been subverted to interests that are neither conducive to nor in the interests of the people or the country. Be they products that hide inherent disaster, allow businesses to continue earth-unfriendly practices or horrific foreign policies (including obscene exploitation) all in the name of short term profits.
I have often stated that in my view basic government principals, like any vehicle ( the constitution is when all is said and done merely a vehicle to get people to a more equitable situation) should be stripped down and worn parts replaced in a programmed fashion. In the process adjusting infrastructural facilities (departments) accordingly. This need for overhaul includes the Constitution, the way our leaders are elected to tax laws et sec.
As a starting point the following point might be considered:
* Periodic Constitutional Plebiscites.
* Each plebiscite would deal with one issue
* Be structured as to be apolitical.
* All non voting entities need to be excluded from participation, trying to influence the outcome other than by submission.
* To eliminate the undue influence of the rich campaigning must be limited to a worth or say $2000. Severe penalties for breaches.
* Submissions would be vetted by judges for unsubstantiated bias and self serving.
* Those passing the test would be presented to the plebiscite at the end of the hearings they would make recommendations for the updated rewrite.
* Once the new articles are written the plebiscite comes together to make final changes and then it goes through the process to be incorporated.
I am aware that there is structure there already but they are controlled by a set of rules almost impossible to achieve. Again this is intended as a thought provoking exercise when it’s all said and done it’s your system and Constitution. Much that I have read on the net leads me to the logical conclusion nothing short of a rewrite will realign of power to We the people the terminal clock is ticking.