View Full Version : Proposed 28th Amendment FYI
Usually I don't get too involved with these situations, but in this case I'm fully in support of it. We have to start somewhere. This was sent to me in an email and I have passed it along to others on my list.
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.
An idea whose time has come
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.
Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ."
mods...not sure if this fit in this forum, but remove if not appropriate.
Business_Casual
04-06-10, 06:58
In my opinion, it is a mistake to open the question of a constitutional convention. When, (not if) control is lost to the progressives, they will remake this country from head to toe with the force of the supreme law in one fell swoop.
If there is some other way to add this amendment, then by all means go for it.
B_C
landrvrnut22
04-06-10, 07:41
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp
Looks like it is just internet rumor again....:rolleyes:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp
Looks like it is just internet rumor again....:rolleyes:
aaahhhh dang....that's what i get for trusting someone. my bad for not researching it better before posting. sorry folks.
CarlosDJackal
04-06-10, 14:25
Even if it wasn't a hoax, IMHO it would be a mistake to pass an Amendment or law that acknowledges differences between Senators or Congressmen and those who elected them.
"A better approach would be to state that elected Officials or Civil Servants cannot be exempt from any Federal, State, or Local laws that are in effect." JM2CW.
In my opinion, it is a mistake to open the question of a constitutional convention. When, (not if) control is lost to the progressives, they will remake this country from head to toe with the force of the supreme law in one fell swoop.
If there is some other way to add this amendment, then by all means go for it.
B_C
You do not need a constitutional convention. There is a well established process for amending the Constitution that has been used for the amendments past the BoR.
(Congress has to vote and so do X number of states have to approve it -- in a nutshell)
You do not need a constitutional convention. There is a well established process for amending the Constitution that has been used for the amendments past the BoR.
(Congress has to vote and so do X number of states have to approve it -- in a nutshell)
That's the whole problem with this idea (even if it's not a hoax). Congress would have to commit ritual suicide in order to enact it. Never gonna happen.
just a scout
04-06-10, 18:03
In my opinion, it is a mistake to open the question of a constitutional convention. When, (not if) control is lost to the progressives, they will remake this country from head to toe with the force of the supreme law in one fell swoop.
If there is some other way to add this amendment, then by all means go for it.
B_C
Strongly agree!
Belmont31R
04-06-10, 19:14
Damn people take need to take a civics class.
Two ways to pass an amendment. Through the states with a 3/4ths vote, and through Congress. For the states it takes 2/3rds to open the Constitution, and then 3/4ths need to ratify the proposed amendment. Congress does not need to be involved. This places another check and balance against the government via the states. They were supposed to also elect senators through the state legislative body but that was changed to be direct vote by the people. Senators were supposed to represent the states, and representatives represent the people. If enough states got sick and tired of the feds passing laws they have to pay for they could get together, and pass an amendment putting a restriction on the feds.
Of course the ultimate check and balance is the ballot box but about half the people don't even vote, and many people are too stupid to vote in their own ultimate best interests. Like my MIL who voted for democrats including Obama because she wanted to give democrats a chance. No real other reason that she could articulate.
Our system has tons of checks and balances in it. However people either dont use them, they get corrupted for a period of time, or enough people agree they don't 'check and balance' like they should.
ETA:
Article V - Amendment
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, 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; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
So a convention may be called by Congress or by 2/3rds of the states. Then 3/4th of the states need to ratify the amendment for it to be passed. Congress does not have anything to do with this route however they, themselves, can call for a convention.
The_War_Wagon
04-06-10, 20:38
Rumor or not, it's a DAMN good idea, and HIGH time CONgress got a dose of their OWN, ahem, "medicine!" :mad:
This would be a great start...after we execute all the lawyers...
VooDoo6Actual
04-07-10, 07:38
Engage in the process and get r done...
I would rather see the effort go into establishing term limits for Senators and Congressman.
IMO, it is long past time senators and reps' give up their golden parachutes, they need to have to live with the consequences of their passage of laws and bills. If we the people have to live with it so should they. Health care is only one item they are exempt from. Social security, full retirement with only one term served, etc. this $hit needs to stop!
Belmont31R
04-07-10, 12:31
IMO, it is long past time senators and reps' give up their golden parachutes, they need to have to live with the consequences of their passage of laws and bills. If we the people have to live with it so should they. Health care is only one item they are exempt from. Social security, full retirement with only one term served, etc. this $hit needs to stop!
I personally think they should make no more than the average income, and of course should not be able to make laws that do not apply to all people including them.
Congress acts as if they are royalty, and its a shame they live high on the hog on the tax payer dollars. Paychecks almost 4x the national average, huge expense accounts. private planes to ferry them around, wine and dine, etc. Then people wonder why they are so far from reality. Because we allow them to live in an alternate reality on our dime.
as a side note to the "Constitutional Convention" issue, there is a long simmering issue. currently I think that 32 states have voted to request the activation of the constitutional convention; not all for the same reason and the time span covers a long time period, but i do not know if there is a time default that would invalidate a state's request that they may have voted on 5 years ago. Several states have rescinded their requests, and others have not. Ohio was the last one in 2008, but the resolution died without a vote. Even if the convention was convened, the subsequent actions would need to be approved by a super majority of states. That would be in interesting thing to see.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/603
the data source is likely tilted, but i the info on the ohio vote is valid.
http://www.lbo.state.oh.us/fiscal/fiscalnotes/127ga/HJR0008IN.htm
once the con-con is convened, then any actions can be put up for vote.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.