Amendments to the US Constitution get proposed quite often (more often than you might think -- take a look); today might have glimpsed a "proposed proposed" amendment worthy as one of the dopiest in recent memory ... just to make a [very] cheap political point:
Democratic freshman Rep. Steve Cohen ... wondered whether the Libby pardon should be the stimulus for a constitutional amendment limiting the president's pardon power. Cohen suggested that once the president proposes to pardon someone, the pardon go to the Supreme Court, where if six of the nine justices objected, then the pardon would not be issued. (Link.)
That's all we need -- even more power in the hands of unelected judges!
Speaking of proposed amendments, I particularly took notice of this one, a proposal by obvious dislikers of corporations (my emphasis):
An Amendment to Preclude Corporations from Claiming Bill of Rights ProtectionsSECTION 1. The U.S. Constitution protects only the rights of living human beings.
SECTION 2. Corporations and other institutions granted the privilege to exist shall be subordinate to any and all laws enacted by citizens and their elected governments.
SECTION 3. Corporations and other for-profit institutions are prohibited from attempting to influence the outcome of elections, legislation or government policy through the use of aggregate resources or by rewarding or repaying employees or directors to exert such influence.
SECTION 4. Congress shall have power to implement this article by appropriate legislation.
Hmm. Anyone else out there think that section 1 would cause those at NOW and Planned Parenthood to have a paroxysm of self-righteous indignation?
Hube:
You are right about the witches at NOW and Planed Parenthood. They would have an aneurysm; I have to look up your word "paroxysm".
Re eligible human beings, over the years I have thought that it would be a good idea to have a law that precluded all but eligible voters from donating money to a candidate. That would limit donations to those who live in a district, or city or state and preclude corporate AND union donations. I think it would also reduce the amount of money in campaigns.
In addition, I would limit self-funding donations to the position's annual salary (i.e senate seats pays about $175K- Jon Corzine would have been limited to that in self-donations).
FYI- isn't Cohen the same arrogant freshman who got in some trouble for spouting after his election in November?
Posted by: AJ Lynch at July 12, 2007 10:07 AMHistorically, giving corporations a status similar to that of citizens, was a long fought battle in the office of the first president between the Secretary of Treasury and the Secretary of State. This argument is the foundation for the formation of the two party system, starting with the Federalists as opposed to the Democrats. Washington, in what was probably his least applauded but most important executive decision, decided in Hamilton's favor.
We can thank our well being today on his foresightedness.........................
Posted by: kavips at July 12, 2007 04:47 PM