maximilianfragglebottom
115630
5650
206
Oct 27, 2020 6:51 PM
maximilianfragglebottom
115630
5650
206
hfctom
Can you imagine today's Republicans re-writing the Constitution of the United States? Wait, that's the plan when Trump gets re-elected
JaromirAzarov
I'd say it's a very bad time to do this. You people can't even get your election done without some banana republic level shit going on...
pwlfwb
The Constitution isn't the problem. It people playing Thesaurus games with the wording that is.
mmckee44
The problem in the US is that because of brilliant Republican marketing, a rewrite of our constitution would give EVEN MORE to the 0.1%.
J0k3rIX
America was never about the people. It was about the money. ALWAYS about the money.
thisisntausername
Yeah they did!, they're also protesting inequality, as the rest of the world, rich are getting richer, poor getting poorer
cyberspork
IIRC the Chilean constitution was written during the tenure of the dictator Pinochet
ace5762
Constitution is designed with mechanism for change. That's why amendments are a thing. The problem is positive change doesn't suit the GOP.
RoloTonyBrown
No problem amending a constitution through proper procedure. That’s a far cry from saying it’s meaning has changed just cuz we feel like it
Camelspotting
There's most definitely a problem, it doesn't happen.
BearUnhinged
Chilean government has been tweaked by foreign corporations for a long time. I hope it works out for them.
sjs260563
USA should look at the electoral college system
HeadlessZombie
good luck getting 38 states to approve amending the constitution to get rid of it. I'm sure they want to give up power in elections.
dogdays2025
Yep
twocatsinatrenchcoat
It needs to be done, but not by the people who are currently in a position to do it
tigercheesesteak
Lol this is the 15th new constitution in Chile, it chaos more than any real meaningful change
ProbablyPoe
And the last time our constitution was amended was in 1992, to include a section written in the late 1800's
KingDougLife
They closed down all the Chile’s where I am from they stopped serving people about a year ago.
ViolenceInherentintheSystem
I want Obama back bama back bama back
bassaro
woozle
we should try that
fdlFan
It's tempting; lord knows our current system isn't working very well. But throwing the door open for a complete rewrite is so risky: 1/
fdlFan
who gets to rewrite it? 2/2
maquito
I think the fact that Chile had one of the worst Military Dictatorships in the history of the world (between 1974 and 1990), (1)
maquito
Might have left a considerable damage to the democratic constitutional rights and laws. Although democracy was brought back in 1990 (2)
maquito
The marks of Pinochet penetrated deep into Chile’s constitution. Congratulations Chile for this recent renewal of democracy and liberty! (4)
maquito
Sorry, should’ve been (3) ^
mike13815
The main issue in the US isn't that the constitution doesn't reflect modern times, it's that it isn't enforced.
ThailandExpress
easyoneundone
Make lobbying illegal, have more than two parties that's all you need
dafluffster
Sure, perhaps we should get rid of that pesky freedom of speech.. Perhaps we should get rid of that FREEDOM part.. Yea.. Lets re-write it.
SirBrendan
Some context: Chile is rewriting the constitution originally implemented by the fascist junta placed by CIA after they voted for a Marxist.
GenshiV
Whoo boy, that is a truth bomb that instantly causes a cognitive rollercoaster of self loathing.
ImAFoxButNotReally
Yes, it was Pinochet's constitution.
beeeeeeerkaaaaa
So we don't actually have that big of a problem? I think the constitution is pretty good. Interpretation is a bit iffy
kpeeps5
Isn't whether we have a problem relative to Chile. It's that we should consider changing our Constitution if it no longer serves the people.
Skywatcher16
the US constitution is in need of modernization. though the reason it no longer serves the people is less due to its content, and more
Skywatcher16
due to the corruption of the officials tasked with carrying it out. we need a hard anti corruption movement here more than anything.
tobodoc
The only change to the constitution needed are congressional term limits. No pensions. No financial incentive to be elected.
dnebdal
Maybe acknowledge the existance of parties? E.g. around redistricting and judge appointments?
dnebdal
(In a way, the biggest structural problem with your constitution is that it was written optimistically assuming no parties.)
tobodoc
I do; however, activist judges in the 60’s and 70’s created a lot of laws with their rulings that could have never passed in Congress.
BootsDusty
TheGhostofElizabethShue
Founding father approved (not that you should care):
HeadlessZombie
This is why you can amend the constitution? Why are you acting like it has not changed sine 1789. It has been amended 27 times since.
dnebdal
What fraction of current voters were alive last time it happened, nevermind of voting age?
Camelspotting
I'm not sure the first 10 count.
xarmypopo
This is also why we allow for Constutional Amendments so that it stays current and generally follows the will of the people.
HeadlessZombie
Liberals don't want to have to go through the process of convincing people of their prospective, they want to bypass the legislative process
somethingsomethingusernamey
Are you referencing to the NPVIC?
fdoyl001
I mean, democrats won the popular vote for presidency in 2016. How many more people do you want us to convince?
fdoyl001
It's not our fault our government doesn't represent the will of the people.
somethingsomethingusernamey
It's a supermajority in the senate and Congress if memory serves.
HeadlessZombie
Well you didn't convince a majority of states so you lost. Popular vote means nothing in the presidential election.
fdoyl001
Yeah, and that's stupid. We're a nation of people, not states.Its stupid that some peoples votes count more than others.That's not democracy
HeadlessZombie
Well we are not a Democracy, we are a Federal Constitutional Republic. If you don't like that you have to change the entire system.
Lordmongoose
No its not stupid. It was a deliberate check on major populations centers from dictating policy for the country. It forces politicians /
somethingsomethingusernamey
You are a nation of States. Ergo, the United States of America. You may disagree as to whether that should or shouldn't be the case.
Camelspotting
It's almost impossible. If it weren't for the judiciary we would have very few civil rights.
somethingsomethingusernamey
It's not designed to be an easy process. It's designed so that reasoned debate, with due consideration towards all the people is heard.
somethingsomethingusernamey
But to preserve civil rights ands liberties, the branches of government have checks and balances built into them
Camelspotting
Which makes it almost impossible when ~30% of your population is hardcore regressive.
somethingsomethingusernamey
The population doesn't matter. The senate and Congress vote on the matter. As dictatorial as that sounds, it's the truth to realise.
clinicalsanity
i feel its important to say that we shouldnt just blame all modern problems on the original writers. How could they have known?
J0765
The constitution is perfect. If people continue to elect horrible representatives you get bad govt. the paper isn’t the problem
Donku83
They didn't know, and they knew they didn't know. That's why they emphasized the amendment process so we can update it as the times change ½
Donku83
Smart on their end. Modern politicians are the idiots ruining things along with the people that keep throwing them in office
bluerazzgummy
My understanding is that the original writers were specifically wary of exactly Americas probs today. Religion, corporations, corruption
clinicalsanity
sure sure, slavery bad, women good, all that jazz, totally their fault, but some of this stuff.. we needed to better.
Them3OtherGuys
No, but we can blame our modern representatives for repeatedly failing the people who put them in office.
money1010
Democratic house
SexDungeonsandDragons
They knew that things wouldn't always be the same, though, so yeah, it's not their bad: https://i.imgur.com/XCfqbiq
therealhobbes
They even had the foresight to build in a mechanism to let future generations adjust it as needed.
MuffinBuffer
It's not weather they knew or not, but the fact that the Second Amendment is not being implemented correctly or at all. Its not the Bible.
MuffinBuffer
It's ment to be literally interpreted
TheMadOnion
I imagine they should have made the Constitution a bit more flexible.
BitterBostonian
The problem is the pedestal it's put on. A good portion of people believe it should never change, and that's a bad thing.
PoorBoyChevelle
"YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION!" Uhhhhh, tf you think amendments are.
BitterBostonian
Not sure if you're mocking me or conservatives? There's 27 amendments. 27 changes to the Constitution in like 250 years, minus the 10 in Bil
BitterBostonian
Bill of Rights
Sageypie
♫To be fair♫...part of the original idea that the founders had for the constitution included reconvening every decade to rewrite it as-
Sageypie
-times and the conditions of America would change. It was decided against pretty early on though, so...yeah. Could have been nice there.
Illithidbane
The ratio of population CA vs. WY is 68:1. I wonder if they would have supported 2 senators/state if they knew it would get that big.
clinicalsanity
Does no good to wonder. Wastes time thst should be used fixing the problem. Its way too common a thing.
leodavinci1
Study history. There's a very good reason for 2 Senators and multiple Representatives for each state.
Mustakraken
There was a "very good reason" for the 3/5ths compromise too, for similar reasons. Turns out, the reasons sucked and have lost relevance.
gorillaClutch
truth be told the original constitution isn't the problem, sure we could update some of it but the biggest issue is politicians selectively/
zoidburgerandfries
And there is your problem...
drunkhistorian
Whose truth is being told here because I have plenty of studied opinion that would say otherwise.
drunkhistorian
We can begin with the heavy Madisonian and Federalist influence on the Constitution to start.
xjsxjs
Shhh....you’re drunk.
drunkhistorian
And has a PhD in US History...
mrmayortheiv
Honestly, it's far from perfect though. Even following it exactly, all the time, we would have issues.
J0765
That’s why there is the ability to amend it built it.
Neurisko
The flawed Constitution enables the corruption of the politicians and unbalanced voter representation. It needs to be easy to fire 'em.
Genriu
Plus, I doubt a rewritten constitution would end up falling in favor of the people....
nemo3590
This. I'll trust the Founders' vision over the current stock. Can you imagine a McConnell version of the Constitution??
Genriu
Yeah no I don't ever wanna see that. If it ever does get rewritten, it should be bipartisan. Maybe not 100% centrist- more best-of-both.
ThisMustBeMyUsername
Maybe we write it like they did, in secret, and rise up to install it...
NVGoddesscottage
Wrong. It’s a white supremist document. See older post on this site.
RanchoCucamonga
We're supposed to amend it. It's been since 1971. 50 years, 3 generations, no amendments.
Edowyth
Technically the 27th passed in 1992. Not that it does much.
CaptainSkyhawk
I would worry about opening the pandora's box of a constitutional convention these days.
hwdja
I think its niave to think its the players not the game. The politians are playing their best hand based on the system. For example 1)
hwdja
Heres how first past the post voting is not the best https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo 2/2
therealhobbes
What we have now is what happens when you start with a great idea and then turn it over to the lawyers for a few hundred years.
Youhavinagiraffe
Yep, the issues with stuff like the 2nd Amendment preventing meaningful gun control is mostly later revisionism instead of the actual text
Youhavinagiraffe
There are probably examples I could use that was less likely to downvoted but I'm happy to die on this hill
kevbot5000
It's a good hill. (good enough that I resisted linking the Garak DS9 "strange hill to die on gif")
limbodog
The electoral college is kind of a big problem
wingineer
Don't even need a Constitutional fix to that! (Not that I'd turn one down.) National Popular Vote Compact!
kingbudo101
which will lead to an amendment being passed or the supreme court will call the compact unconstitutional
wingineer
SCOTUS can try, but Art 2 §1.2 clearly lets states do this. If they pretend otherwise that'll give impetus to pack the Court and/or amend.
YouSufferWithCognitiveDissonance
The Constitution has been ignored for most of it's history
daneq7
Its* ya cunt
Bonermuffin
Most of it is history
isthisusernamealreadychosen
Most of it's its history
Bonermuffin
It is most of it’s its history
gorillaClutch
/ignoring parts of it or misinterpreting it intentionally to suit their current needs
AZRAELSBLADE
Just like Christians!
Wozzup
If your constitution only works when politicians feel like it, you've got a problem with your constitution.
thevirus84
Honestly. Id say that itself is a reason to rewrite it.
Ebo352
Sounds like we need to put term limits in the constitution
thevirus84
Honestly. Id say that itself is a reason to rewrite it.
thevirus84
Honestly. Id say that itself is a reason to rewrite it.
icommentwithsteveharvey
Basically, dont trust GOP, GOP is asshoe
Techpriest93
Plus you guys are the only country to pRIVATIZE WATER
JustYourAverageNerd
Wasn't the original constitution really bad because it was written by the dictatorship prior? Heard from close Chilean friend.
thevirus84
Honestly. Id say that itself is a reason to rewrite it.
TheCoolTech
I would be scared to see a rewrite in today's political climate.
attylloyd
and lobbying being legal
FourLegsGood
I'm starting to think your supreme court is actually a hostile branch of the government.
Shackram
If it can be abused, surely then it isnt up to scratch?
Twrecks123
Just like the Bible. Which the GOP also claims to follow.
Beybeyboomer
Listen, I hate the GOP as much as the next guy, but pretending its just them isn't gonna fix the problem.
MaliceofTheHighestDegree
zimirken
The lord says do everything to help your fellow man, including illegals and minorities
Fatkats93
You haven't convinced me. I still think it should be rewritten with updated terminology, lingo, and perspective.
Samja192
Which wouldn't work if the average person was properly educated.
2cusswords
Imagine Mitch McConnell having his blackened hand in on rewriting our Constitution. *shivers*
epiccalm
A good point - part of the vote in Chile was also that an elected committee of civilians (not current office holders) would draft it.
StanielRonathan
It's okay, it means he's only got 3/5's the signing power according to his ideals
DaisyTeddyBear
If ye wait until after the civil war, ye might get some decent survivers
fdlFan
Exactly. This to me is the major risk, that any such effort would be used to take rights away from marginalized groups and reinforce 1/
fdlFan
existing imbalances of power. 2/2
therealhobbes
I think that's exactly what it would be used for and exactly why there haven't been any changes recently. Political parties are only 1/2
therealhobbes
interested in reinforcing their own hold on power and not in any form of compromise. Thankfully, one hasn't been able to dominate 2/3
therealhobbes
enough to lock in its hold on power and totally rule the country. No matter how tempting a platform. Power corrupts, absolute power....
fdlFan
Hasn't one?
therealhobbes
California (and to a lesser extent Texas) is what one party domination looks like. We still get to vote between R & D, not R1, R2 or D1, D2.
BootsDusty
TatanyaTanatia
Well... people are leaving CA enough that come tax season, they push tvs and cardboard boxes at WalMart
TatanyaTanatia
I saw it and moved cross country this year. From CA to AR
BushDidWolf359
Founding Fathers didn’t have tea because they threw it all in the harbor. Checkmate libz!
orivalx
Iirc the electoral college was made bc the founding fathers thought the average American was too fucking stupid.
Skywatcher16
and now, in a case of true irony, its become the cudgel by which a moron minority controls the nation.
FajitaPrinceofAllMexicans
That's why we got amendments but they just didn't calculate that corruption would just run rampant in the government.
pooslap
Yeah they had no clue how govt could be corrupt. Lol
FajitaPrinceofAllMexicans
It's probably more of a pride thing, admitting the thing you(r subordinates) fought for is going to deal with corruption.
NotRightNeverWrong
That's what the House is for.
Skywatcher16
the house that has been basically irrelevent in governing for 2 decades as the seante runs roughshod over it?
Nightcaste
That's what the House is for.
GloomyGusterson
Founding father "...but how many of them own land?"
andrewrankin1087360
Just remember, canada is way bigger land mass the california, but there are more ppl in cali then all of canada
vpi77
California has a larger population than Canada.
ThefluteCaptainPicardplayedfirstinhisimaginationtheninreallife
population of Wyoming: ~580k, 2 Senators, population of Washington DC: ~685k, 0 senators
Nightcaste
DC was explicitly carved out so that a local government wouldn't be able to hold the federal government hostage.
PoorBoyChevelle
So what you're saying is DC should be a state. I'm on board with this.
StillNotYouTube
And Puerto Rico.
tobodoc
Maryland should just absorb DC. Problem solved.
treed240z
There are 31 cities that have a larger population than the STATE of Wyoming.
TheMadOnion
Yet you have dumbass hics that can't genuinely understand why States like California or New York have so many delegates compared to it...
Micro2112
browncheez
Hold up. 1 persons vote has more value than another one? Amrica. This give me confusion.
Blud4BludGod
I bet a ton of them are in CA too, lol.
GodsFoot
Also WHAT IS THE POINT OF TWO DAKOTAS? Let's merge them and add PR as a state to keep the even 50. No need for flag redesign
ShitSpeckledMuppetFart
And the capital of Wyoming is maybe 100,000 people
youknowthatonepersonwiththeface
63k. They have almost 3x more voting power than someone in Knoxville, (closest big city to me(. Their county has 33k less people than mine
ShitSpeckledMuppetFart
Wow. I lived in Laramie for a little bit, there’s SO much open space
youknowthatonepersonwiththeface
I just looked it up, 2k more people enrolled at UCF in 2017 than live in Cheyenne now
ableck
And we're talking city limits here, 95 metropolitan areas are more populous than all of Wyoming.
Bonermuffin
Hell we have more livestock than people
vowofloudness
There are more people in Los Angeles today than the entire US in 1790.
Camelspotting
We used to adjust representatives by population, not as much anymore.
Sppon4
It’s done with every census
Camelspotting
This is more what I was referring to https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/09/opinion/expanded-house-representatives-size.html
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
Not with the EC it's not, because each state gets at least three votes. One for every senator (so two) and one for every representative /1
Sppon4
The number of representatives is capped. But they adjust based off the census
The EC
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
Then it will never be correctly proportioned for the big states. Because the low-population states can't have less than 1. So the higher /1
therealhobbes
We still adjust, it's just not as proportional anymore because the number of representatives is capped. So the pie just gets shuffled.
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
(so at least one). Even the number of reps in Congress is uneven, because you can't have less than one rep. So for example CA has /2
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
53 and Wyoming has 1. But the population of CA is 65x that of WY, so already CA is underrepresented, because they have 65x the population /3
J0765
This is by design. Which is why we have another house that represents population.
EternalDesireforBreadandCheese
The House of Reps have capped the seat count in 1913, so the population is not remotely represented accurately
Skywatcher16
yet somehow, despite this separation, we have still managed to become slaves to a single tyrant turtle from fucking kentucky.
J0765
Because the people watching (that we elected) aren’t doing their jobs. We have to do better at who we put in Congress.
PoorBoyChevelle
Because, inexplicably to me, the Senate is the "upper" chamber
Skywatcher16
upper and lower chamber is a misnomer. they are supposed to be two halves of the same single coequal branch of government, one unable to
Skywatcher16
to actually act without the other, as each one only has half the powers needed to legislate. the least couple decades however, have somehow
tobodoc
The right was held hostage by Reid. No one takes into account is what you do to me today, I will do worse to you tomorrow. There is no honor
Skywatcher16
the right was held hostage by harry reid? what?
tobodoc
Reid tampered with customary senate procedures that allowed nominations to go through with only a simple majority. He helped destroy the
GenshiV
But muh originalism! Oh right, there's that small matter of a few things having changed since the 1700s that maybe need updating.
NoWonderImStillAwake
That's what the amendment process is for...
woozle
Amendment 32: The government will take care of the populace during a pandemic.
IAmDrBanner
I mean, the constitution has suffered many changes and additions. Many of them not exactly for the better. Not to say it is a perfect /1
IAmDrBanner
piece of paper that should remain unchanged for all time, of course, but the point is that it is hardly unchanged from the 1700s. /2
OhMyGodTheyKilledBrianYouBastards
The constitution and the framework created by the founding fathers created a structure that greatly succeeds in the world. It’s not there
dnebdal
The US is almost unique in making it work well - many south Am countries copied it and failed; it makes for unstable two-party systems.
dnebdal
Which suggests that the US has especially strong democratic traditions, and your system is workable but not perfect?
OhMyGodTheyKilledBrianYouBastards
To cater to your every whim. The constitution does it’s job. The problem isn’t the constitution. It’s that people can’t stop being dicks.
ToasterDent
For one, in the original Constitution, women were ineligible to be on the Supreme Court.
Elroydb
By societal norms, not by the Constitution. No amendment was necessary for women to serve on the Supreme Court
ToasterDent
Yeah I thought about that after posting. I should have said it was the intent of the Constitution's writers that women not be judges, 1/
ToasterDent
otherwise they would have mentioned it in the Constitution.
Elroydb
That is a fair point. An originalist wouldn't argue that specific point due to the 19th Amendment though
ontarioOT
3/5ths of a person. If anyone claims they're an originalist, ask them to square that with, you know, black people being people.
NoWonderImStillAwake
You realize that it was the slave owners that fought for black slaves to be counted as a whole person so it would bolster their number of
NoWonderImStillAwake
reps in the south right? Even though blacks couldn't vote and had basically no rights in the south. 3/5 was a compromise and though it is
NoWonderImStillAwake
ugly as hell, most likely we wouldn't even be a country today had that not existed, then the amendment process came along and eliminated it,
NoWonderImStillAwake
along with a lot of other ugly parts of the founding. To live in today's world and criticize people who lived 250 years ago as if you would
GenshiV
It's 2020, I'm pretty sure their white supremacy is on full display & they're willing to own that one... Fuck me. The times we live in, eh?
Elroydb
And they'll tell you to read the amendments, specifically the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 19th. They are part of the Constitution
OhMyGodTheyKilledBrianYouBastards
Ugh... the amendments are part of the constitution. You do realize that.
ontarioOT
So we shouldn't interpret it the way it was originally written? It can be amended? Then why call it originalism if it's not the original?
Elroydb
Article 5 provides the framework for amending the Constitution
ontarioOT
I'm aware that it can be, I'm just arguing how ridiculous of a position originalism is in practice.
HeadlessZombie
That is why you have a process of changing the constitution called amending. You go through a legislative process to change things.
GenshiV
That's great, right up until you have a gridlocked house & senate & a majority leader who refuses to let things be debated on the floor.
therealhobbes
At a certain point, the parties became more interested in trying to seize all power as opposed to representing the American people.
therealhobbes
Neither has succeeded... neither has quit. So we get deadlock where they'd rather score political points instead of govern.
HeadlessZombie
That is part of our system of government to stop tyranny of the majority. Everyone has feel like they have a say or it does not work.
GenshiV
The tyranny of the majority? You mean implementing policies that a majority of the country supports? Yeah, that's called representation.
HeadlessZombie
No I mean 51% does not get to dictate the direction of the nation to 49%. You have to have a case appeals to both sides and all people.
IPostOffensiveShit
That system has been proven to be complete garbage. Nothing ever gets done until a party seizes control.
HeadlessZombie
Well that is how the government works in the USA I don't know what to tell you. You have to be able to convince the other side.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
therealhobbes
That's intellectually dishonest and you know it.