SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The U.S. Constitution has 27 amendments; each was proposed by Congress and ratified by the states.
However, the Constitution sets forth another procedure, never before used, for amending the Constitution. At the request of two thirds of the states, a constitutional convention would be held, at which amendments could be proposed. Any proposals would become part of the Constitution if three fourths of the states ratified them, either at state conventions or in the state legislatures.
Currently, 27 of the needed 34 states have petitioned Congress for a constitutional convention, for the ostensible purpose of writing a balanced-budget amendment (BBA). However, the convention might propose other changes in addition or instead of a BBA—even a total rewrite of the Constitution—if 38 states agreed, the changes would become law.
In November, legislators from 30 states met in Salt Lake City to discuss the matter.
- Forbes article from 2014 (mirror)
- John Birch Society (has a map)
- utahpolicy.com
- Deseret News
- Yellowhammer News
- The Universe—Brigham Young University
- San Francisco Chronicle
- KSTU-TV
- The Columbian
- Washington Post blog about historical attempts at constitutional conventions
- The Spokesman-Review
(Score: 2) by acp_sn on Friday December 11 2015, @06:20PM
My amendment would go something like this:
1. no government entity may spend non tax revenue as a part of its budget
1.a. non tax revenues include but is not limited to fines, fees, settlements, tolls, tariffs, and seizures
2. all non-tax revenue is returned as a tax refund to each resident of the taxing jurisdiction which collects the revenue.
2.a the refund is equal to the total amount collected divided evenly amongst each tax-paying resident of the jurisidiction
3. any government employee who uses non-tax revenue for any purpose other than refunding it has committed a felony offense with a minimum of 5 years in prison (maximum 10 for willful or flagrant offense) and a 100k fine + 10x the amount not refunded to the taxpayers
In plain language government budgets have to come from taxes and no other source. This prevents all of the problems of law enforcement for profit. It also still allows for fines as a deterrent to anti-social behavior and allows for fees to throttle the usage of limited resources. But it prevents politicians from spending this money and requires them to have the courage to raise taxes if they want more money to spend.
This would increase everyones taxes but give big refunds at the same time. No matter what tax system you support it is a fundamentally more "fair" way of funding the government.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 11 2015, @07:40PM
Even this could be abused. Imagine a jurisdiction where all of the members of congress reside issuing a lot of bogus fines for various things. All that money is refunded to the members of that district.
Now if the refund were to be paid to the entire state, or the whole country, regardless of what level the fine was collected, then there would be a little less room for such abuses.
I'd also suggest a clause stating that anyone paying a fine, or surrendering seized properties (products, valuables, etc.), would be ineligible for a refund up to the value of the fine or property. Thus, they cannot in effect get their money back from the fine they paid.
Regardless of how an amendment is written, someone who is determined will find a way to abuse it. There are a lot of determined people in the world today.