For several years people out there have been farting around with the constitution, wanting to amenD it heRE and there, but other more vile plans would call for a Constitutional Convention.
Different than merely amending the constitution it could literally tear it up and propose a new one. New from beginning to end. No Free Speech. No guarantee off free Voting. No allowance to bear arms in any form. No individual rights at all.
Then they could take and do two things to the presidency. They could make him a figurehead and replace his real powers with a Prime Minister, such as they have in England. That might not be so bad, as long as it was easy to get rid of him or her when needed.
But they could replace the President with a strong man much like Vladimir Putin. They could allow him do do whatever he pleases and do it whenever he wants. He could rule by fiat. He could take direct control of the military at any time, it could take away some of the rights that states have now. It could even take the National Guard away from State Control.
In short it could take what is a pretty good way right now and turn it into an autocratic mess with the President having a lot of power,
Or it could take away much of the presidents power and give it to Congress, where they experience gridlock much of the time. That would possibly not be good, though during the current crisis it looks like congress needs actually look at the way he rules by fiat, doing such things as reneging on woodland types of designations, or protected areas and reserves. This president has reversed several of the executive orders of President Obama concerning ares, mostly, for preservation, such as areas he had designated in the Alaskan wilderness for preservation, thus no oil drilling, and Trump reversed the decision. Once a president does that, it should only be reversible by congressional action.
After all when congressional action result in a bill that they send to the President, he can veto the bill, and the only way congress can get it back on track is to pas it with a 2/3rds majority. Why not give the same type of authority to Congress over the President. If he wants to reverse a previous Presidents fiat by saying, ‘Why don’t we take away the status as a National Treasure to be protected and damn up the Grand Canyon?’ So he signs an Executive Order and it’s done.
It can be done. Congress had to take action to establish Wilderness Areas as total preserves for, well, wilderness. As things now work the President cannot undo that designation. Using this example though President A can designate something called Bears Ears, which is near Native American land but not on it. He thought it was worth preserving, thus no oil drilling, no mining, so he preserved it by Executive Order. Along comesPresident B and, because oil and mining executives want to ruin the land, he signed an order which significantly shrank the size of it so mining and oil exploration can take place.
This is the type of arrogant things President should not do. No past President has ever undone the protections for wildlife, preserving areas from being abused in the name of money, while at the same time saving endangered wildlife, reefs and pristine waters, cultural significant sites, and more. That should be restricted, by Congressional action or if needed by constitutional Amendment. There are some things a President should not be allowed to do, including selling his influence and abusing peoples rights, such as refugees (keeping in mind that the U.S. is signatory to an international concordat that says persons claiming refugee status must-read that as MUST- be given a hearing before a judge. Trump is ignoring this, illegally. That should also be addressed in an amendment.
This does not mean we advocate gutting Presidential Authority, but we have seen a Congress controlled by Republicans that are complicit in High Crimes and Misdemeanors. This needs to end. We do not need a full, open ended Constitutional Convention, but we need to have some way of reigning in a mad man or despot, as well as forcing Congress-especially the Senate- to
stand up and do due diligence in their advice and consent role, and the honesty of sharing information during hearings reflecting on this country.The way Judiciary Committee has held back what could be important information regarding an appointee is scandalous. Same with the House Intelligence Committee. All of this information must be available to all members of those committees, and withholding it should be literally unconstitutional.
Stay tuned to this site, as these matters will come up soon, and repeatedly.