I have a dumb question: Since the Constitution already limits FedGub to a fraction of the monster it has become today — why would an amended Constitution make a difference?
Yeah, that’s my question as well.
Well, the constitution has been amended to make citizens of slaves, change how senators are elected (that would be a good one to repeal), equal sufferage and the like which amendments have been followed. Perhaps the only thing that needs changing is taking the general welfare comment out of the preamble, who knows. But nothing else is working and all I see is more power going to DC and into the Executive Branch. Funny, the first branch of government listed in the constitution is the Congress, not the executive and yet the order of power has been so far changed to make it appear there is one primary branch and two rubber stamp branches.
Here's the ancient Chinese secret, though. The states may have created the federal government but we, the people, loan the states whatever power they wield.
The Tenth Amendment says the powers not delegated to the government by the states are reserved by the states or the people. The Declaration of Independence says government are instituted among men by the consent of the governed. That's us. WE are the governed. WE have the power to change to change the government.
WE need to get that through our thick skulls.
There are amendments to the USC that are mistakes, the 16th and the 17th to name two. They need to be repealed and a CoS could do it. We have to do something, or better yet lets skip the Constitutional formalities go to secession and then a huge civil war. I am ok either way.
You can read the first chapter at Amazon. He explains it all.
Because we could eliminate the federal govenment and return to the states. Just make an amendment that zaps the feds! I like the sound of that!!!!! :)
The fact is that most people do not understand basic civics or history. To quote one highly esteemed history expert:
"Did the Japanese go and sit down and have dinner with Pearl Harbor before they bombed em?"
Your question is based on the premise that our trusted servants in the federal government practice an "all or nothing" philosophy, where they either follow all of the constitution, or none of it. But that is not the case--your premise is false to begin with. Actually, only certain parts are ignored by certain limbs of branches of fedgov, and we all are frustrated with that.
The new amendments proposed are such that they would not be able to ignore them. Term limits, for example--our fed overlords would not be able to ignore or screw with. Not without bloodshed. That, for me, would be the point where the tree of liberty gets watered well, and I suspect I am not alone.
Not a dumb question, IMO.
I was thinking of another question: If a regime such as the one in power today does not follow the Constitution, why would adding more proscriptions to the Constitution change such a regime’s behavior?
It wouldn’t. It’s time to enforce the Constitution that’s already there (for a change).