Sunday, June 11, 2006

Question Of The Week, 6/11/06

Good morning. I was having trouble deciding what to ask this week. Then I thought of something that might be fun. If you click on my name at the top of the page to read about me it says,"I'm a Husband,Father,a Grand Father and a concerned citizen. I spend a good deal of time reading the news and writing letters to the editor. I'm in such close contact with my congressmen that their e-mail address's are in my address book. I'm concerned about what will be left of the Republic our Founding Fathers left us by the time my Grand Children become adults." OK, for right now you are one of the United States Senators from your state (Congratulations Senator). Your going to write one piece of legislation that will help preserve our Constitutional Republic for my (and your) Grand Children. It is guaranteed to pass, all you have to do is write it. This weeks Question Of The Week is. What is your one piece of Republic saving legislation going to cover? Tell us as much or as little about it as you care to. I'll post my answer in the Comment Section Monday night.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.


Anonymous Jake Porter said...

I would ban all companies/governments from placing implantable microchips in humans and also attach a rider to stop the Real ID Act.

5:08 AM  
Blogger The Sovereign Editor said...

To Amend the Constitution:

Congress shall make no law causing a citizen of the United States to suffer any restriction of liberty or social stigma for any act or omission unless such act or omission:

(a) be one of force or fraud; and
(b) committed with the:
(1) intent; or
(2) consequence resulting from gross negligence
of depriving another person or specifically identifiable group of life, liberty, or property.

* * *

I might be cheating there -- an Amendment is a huge thing. So here it is in statute form (just in

No citizen of the United States shall suffer any restriction of liberty or any institutional social stigma for any act or omission under any law of the United States unless such act or omission:

(a) be one of force or fraud; and
(b) committed with the:
(1) intent; or
(2) consequence resulting from gross negligence
of depriving another person or specifically identifiable group of life, liberty, or property.

Without exception, SECTION 1 abrogates all conflicting laws as of its date of passage. This effect is retroactive to the date an affected law was enacted.

* * *

The trouble with a statute, though, is that Congress can easily abrogate it. However, the way it is written would immediately free a huge currently criminalized segment of our society and they would have full voting rights. I don’t think Congress could easily abrogate this law. But it would definitely work better as a Constitutional Amendment.

11:50 AM  
Blogger Carrie Oakey said...

I would pass the Marriage Protection Act, to save the sanctity of marriage from the homosexuals who wish to soil it!

3:04 PM  
Anonymous Jake Porter said...

Marriage Licenses were only started after the civil war to stop whites and blacks from intermarrying. Marriage licenses, in my opinion, should eliminated. If you have a right from God to do something why ask the government for permission.

With national ID cards, the government searches of private property without warrants, the national debt, and gun laws, I find it odd that peoples number one concern is homosexuality.

3:59 PM  
Anonymous And Another Thing said...

My legislation would restrict House members to 3 terms; Senators to 2 terms. It would also make it a felony to accept ANYTHING from ANYBODY with an interest in legislation. Perhaps the presidency to one 6-year term also.

Of course, such an arrangment would bring our government to a screeching halt, but then again I wonder what could be worse than what goes on now?

4:53 PM  
Blogger Stephanie said...

Wow. One piece of legislation geared towards saving the Republic...

That's a tough one, because I don't think there's any easy solutions to the problems that have been building for decades in this nation. However, if I had ONE solution that was guaranteed to pass that I would wish to enact it would revolve around transparency.

I would enact a bill that would force the government to make its actions transparent to the people and the information must be easily accessible and written in language that a person with a current high school diploma can understand.

I would word this legislation is such a way as to cover everything from how would-be representatives raise funds for their campaigns, to why each individual representative voted for a piece of legislation, to the purposes of all pieces of legislation itself, AND to include the actions and decisions of non-elected government officials that make up our bureaucracy.

1:50 AM  
Blogger Stephanie said...

realms of sovereigns,

I'm not sure how forcing through a Costitutional amendment, which is supposed to be up to the people, would be protecting the Republic; but I do see your point about Congress abrogating that legislation-as-statue.

1:52 AM  
Blogger Stephanie said...

Carrie Oakey,

You post a picture of yourself that implies nudity, and yet you're worried about protecting the sanctity of marriage from homosexuals? Does anyone else see the apparent hypocrisy here, or is it just me?

1:55 AM  
Blogger The Sovereign Editor said...

Excerpt from Article V of the Constitution for the United States:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution . . . which. . . shall be valid . . . as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress.

* * *

No one's talking about forcing anything. As you can see, it is correct and proper for Congress to propose amendments. The controlling parameter of this exercise is that any legislation I write is "guaranteed to pass" I'm not sure a Constitutional amendment counts as 'legislation', but the process is the same. Since all legislation starts as a bill, I am writing a bill proposing a Constitutional amendment.

Legislation is fine and dandy, but with the Supreme court the way it is, and with Congress the way it is, the only way we're going to get out of this mess is to get a tightly worded amendment through that severely restricts Congress's ability to deprive us of life, liberty, or property.

Since I wasn't sure if the magic "pass guarantee" extended to the ratification process, or indeed to any bill whether or not it is legislation (though if I have the support to pass any legislation, it ought to follow that I have the support to pass any bill), I also presented my amendment idea as a statute.

The trouble with laws Congress makes to bind itself is that they often don't work since the Supreme Court ruled that no one has standing to sue the Congress to compel compliance.

Maybe that would be a good statute:

SECTION I: Citizen suits

(a) Authority to bring civil action

Any United States citizen may commence a civil action on his or her own behalf—

(1) against any officer, employee, or elected official, of the United States; and/or
(2) against the United States, any legislative or executive body thereof, and any other governmental instrumentality or agency to the extent permitted by the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution

where there is alleged to be a failure of the person and/or entity named in the suit to perform any act or duty required in the laws of the United States.

(b) Jurisdiction

The district courts shall have jurisdiction to order the performance of such act or duty, as may be required by law, and to apply any appropriate civil penalties. The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to compel action unreasonably delayed.

7:12 PM  
Blogger Always On Watch said...

I'm too tired to write a properly worded amendment, but I'd like to see something done about the courts. Activist judges are legislating from the bench, and I don't believe such was ever the intention of our Founders. Checks-and-balances are circumvented by our courts, particularly the federal ones.

8:50 PM  
Blogger David Schantz said...

I'm a little late as always and real tired. Monday was not a real good night at work. I want to thank all of you for stopping by to answer this weeks question. Good answers, to bad you haven't really been elected. My legislation would give third party and independent presidential candidates a fighting chance.

After a presidential candidate gets the required number of signatures on petitions to get their name or party name on the ballot in fifteen states that candidate will be allowed (invited) to take part in all presidential debates.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

12:17 AM  
Blogger Tom Harper said...

I would amend the Constitution so that ALL victimless "crimes" are no longer illegal. Many conservatives are in favor of making criminals pay repatriations to their victims. I'm in favor of this. And that would be the guideline. If there's no victim, no crime was committed.

12:20 AM  
Blogger Katherine Thayer said...

For me... i like Climate Change law. Human activities influence climate and related systems through, among other mechanisms, land usage, water management, and earlier and more significant melting of snow cover due to greenhouse-effect warming.

11:16 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home