Commentary on These Proposed Amendments

The commentaries in this section express my opinions. I am neither a constitutional scholar nor a legislator. My name is Bob Hardy, and I am a citizen of the United States of America with a love for my country and for the people of my country. I find that the original thinking of the framers of our Constitution was sound, but has been subverted over the course of time. Some of the proposed amendments presented here are aimed at returning to the common sense of the original intent. Some are to remedy modern situations that were not at issue 200 years ago, but should be addressed today.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-001: The government of the United States of America, and of the several color, ethnicity, or national origin.

states, shall make no law, rule or directive that discriminates against, or grants preferential treatment under the law to, any individual or group on the basis of race, gender,

The Civil Rights Act of 1994 attempted to give all Americans the equal footing in matters of life, liberty and economics. All citizens and legitimate visitors should be treated the same under the law. This amendment would address that issue and clarify this right of absolute equality.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-002: Neither Congress, nor the legislatures of the several states, shall make any law abridging the right to ownership of property, whether tangible property, intangible property or real property, nor abridging the property owner's right of determination with regard to the use of the property or any resources contained within, save for uses directly detrimental to owners or tenants of adjacent properties. The use, value or possession of such property shall not be taken or diminished by the government of the United States, or of the several States, without compensation of one and a half times the value of said loss as determined by an independent third party.

A person's right to own and control property is bedrock to freedom. Several of the early amendments address this right to own property or provide prohibitions to infringement on that right without due process or due compensation; Amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 & 14.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-003: Neither Congress, nor the legislatures of the several states, nor of any municipality within, shall make any law abridging or regulating the right of any person, having reached the age of sixteen, to own, possess and display personal deadly weapons, or to use same in defense of self or of others from bodily harm, except that persons duly convicted of crimes of physical violence may be restricted for a period not to exceed five years subsequent to any term of incarceration whether served or suspended.

The personal safety of the citizens of any land is dependent upon the level of protection from harm. No nation can provide enough police personnel to protect all its inhabitants, therefore the right to self protection must not be abridged.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-004: Neither Congress, nor the legislatures of the several states, shall make any law abridging the right of the people to the free exercise of religion or of religious speech, whether in private or in public, or by people engaged in public service by occupation whether appointed, elected or by hire, except that no act of physical coercion shall be protected by this article.

Amendment one of the Bill-Of-Rights prohibited laws that restrict the free exercise of religion. Over time the courts have diluted this right by building a wall of separation of church from state. This, of course, is inconsistent with the first amendment. You cannot protect the free exercise of religion by prohibiting the free exercise of religion. There can be no wall separating church from state. State must stay out of religion, and refrain from dictating the actions of religious persons, but religious persons must have the freedoms enjoyed by all Americans to take part in the rights and responsibilities of our representative government.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-005: The Congress of the United States shall make no law regarding or regulation of events or issues of a local nature including crimes against persons or states, land use and natural resources, intrastate transportation, recreation and the arts, health and education of the people, and the economic security of the indigent.

The Federal government is not the proper body to legislate, regulate or administer events and issues of a local nature. The people, through their state and municipal bodies, are more knowledgeable of the needs and problems facing them, and better able to provide solutions that solve those needs. Other states and municipalities face varying circumstances and may need solutions that are different from one community to the next. The various states are very capable of cooperation on problems of a regional nature. Most issues do not present circumstances equal, or even similar, throughout the fifty states. Therefore, it is moronic to expect to find national solutions to regional or local problems. Issues not national in character should be left to the states to handle. This does not mean that national resources cannot be used to aid the states in handling local issues. For instance, acts of crime are local in nature, but a nationally maintained database of criminal profiles and fingerprints could aid

local police in solving crimes without interfering with their law enforcement responsibilities. History has taught us that national action usually means the waste of resources spent on the huge Federal organizations needed to administer programs on a national scale. With agencies set up to provide "The Solution" in places where they did not even have "The Problem".

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-006: Neither the Supreme Court of the United States, nor any of the inferior courts established by the Congress, shall make any law not properly enacted by the Congress and approved by the President nor cause or demand the expenditure of moneys not appropriated by the Congress.

The Constitution established a balance of powers scheme for our government. A bicameral legislative body to enact laws, an executive to approve and enforce the laws, and a court to judge disputes under the laws. We have seen the court come to the point where the abuse of power is almost daily news, in that judges flagrantly enact laws not enacted by Congress or approved by the President, and appropriate funds and raise taxes by decree, in direct violation of Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-007: No person shall be appointed to serve more than one term of ten years as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Any person serving as a Justice or Chief Justice at the time this article becomes operative, and having served more than seven years, shall be entitled to continue to serve an additional four years, unless impeached. No person shall be appointed to serve more than two terms of six years as a Judge or Justice in any of the inferior courts established by the Congress. Any person serving in an inferior court of the United States as a Judge or Justice at the time this article becomes operative, and having served more than seven years, shall be entitled to continue to serve an additional five years, unless impeached.

History has shown us that there is a need for Judges and Justices to be held accountable to the people, to live within the law, not above the law.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-008: No person shall be elected to serve more than two terms of six years as a Senator of the United States. Any person serving as a Senator at the time this article becomes operative, and having served more than six years, shall be entitled to continue to serve the completion of his current term, unless recalled or impeached. The imposition of a greater limitation on the term of service for its Senators is the prerogative of each state and its people.

The Constitution has no provision for more than one term for Senators because the legislature was to be made up of citizen-legislators serving part time for a season, then going home to their families and regular occupations. History has taught us the folly of professional legislators and the corruption that comes with being "Too long within the beltway".
PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-009: No person shall be elected to serve more than three terms of four years as a member of the House of Representatives of the United States. One half of all Representatives from each state serving at the time this article becomes operative shall be entitled to continue to serve the completion of his current term, unless recalled or impeached. The other half shall be entitled to continue to serve the completion of his current term plus two years, unless recalled or impeached. The selection of which Representative to serve the longer initial term shall be made in each state by alphabetical sequence first by last name then first name, with the first name and then every other name in the sequence selected. No person shall be reelected to the House of Representatives having already served over twelve years in such service. The imposition of a greater limitation on the term of service for its Representatives is the prerogative of each state and its people.

The Constitution has no provision for more than one term for Representatives because the legislature was to be made up of citizen-legislators serving part time for a season, then going home to their families and regular occupations. History has taught us the folly of professional legislators and the corruption that comes with being "Too long within the beltway".

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-010: No citizen, or alien lawfully within the United States, shall be deprived of the rights enumerated in the Constitution of the United States during his lifetime from conception through demise, except for rebellion or other felony crimes.

For freedom to exist, the "rule of law" must be maintained as a principle of governance. This freedom and the rights afforded by our constitution must be extended to all Americans and legal visitors, even if they have attained old age, or haven't attained any age yet at all.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-011: The United States shall neither own nor control any land outside the district designated as the seat of government other than that needed for the erection of military forts and bases, air stations, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards and buildings needed for the administration of government and the courts.

The need of the government for lands and buildings necessary to house the materiel and personnel required for the administration of government and the military forces is acknowledged. In Section 8 of Article One, the U. S. Constitution gave Congress the power "to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful

buildings". Besides these "Needful Buildings" the constitution allowed the Congress power over a "District (not exceeding ten miles square)". The government should not be the "Great Land Baron" over millions of square miles of land. Land not needed for military reservations and Federal buildings rightly belongs to the people. Not "The People" in the Community sense, but as individuals.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-012: The Congress of the United States shall make no laws regulating or restricting the growth of any business or industry, but shall defer that power to the states and economic forces.

The government of the United States should do whatever is in its power to encourage the development and growth of industries in this country. Every nation's life blood depends on the economic health and growth of its industry.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-013: The Congress of the United States shall ensure that the budget of the government of the United States of America shall have no deficit spending imbalance commencing with the first fiscal year beginning after the date of enactment of this article. The United States shall collect no taxes in aggregate greater than ten percent of the gross national product. No income tax shall be levied unless at a single rate equally applied to individual personal incomes. No value-added tax or consumption tax shall be legislated.

A government exists to provide military defense and other necessary public services to the people. Draining the economic life out of the people through excessive taxation goes against this purpose, and no nation has prospered under those conditions. We have seen in history, especially recent history, how easily government can grow out of all proportion when fed unlimited funds through run-away taxation and easy debt accumulation. To limit government to a balanced budget, and at the same time limit taxation to a reasonable proportion of other economic activity, such as GNP, would put a control on the tendency for both spending and taxation to grow. The type of taxation to use should be established within the constitution. I like the idea of a national sales tax because it would extend taxation to the hidden economy made up of those who will not report income to be taxed. However, I am quite familiar with sales tax regulations issued by several of the states, and know how complicated this kind of tax can be. To make "everybody" a tax collector, as a sales tax would require, would necessitate having a simple tax

code. That is just not possible with a sales tax. There are too many variables, and too many exceptions or exemptions required. It would necessitate a large tax collection bureaucracy, such as the Internal Revenue Service, to administer such a complicated code. A simple single-rate tax on earned personal income, with a statutory limitation, would be the easiest to administer, and would be fair to all taxpayers. It would still require a revenue service department to regulate (define taxable income, etc.), and for collections, but it would be a much smaller bureaucracy. A value added tax would be a monster, with new taxes on the same goods at every level of economic activity. Even with a small tax rate the taxes could easily exceed the real value of the goods. A value added tax would definitely not be in the best interests of the economy or of the country. The bureaucracy needed to audit a value-added-taxed economy would have to be immense. The economy would be drained of all economic life.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT PA-014: Within thirty days of the enactment of this article the President of the United States shall extend an invitation to Puerto Rico and any island possession or protectorate of the United States, and any independent island nation situated in or near the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico or southwestern Atlantic Ocean, to unite together as one state and be admitted to this union. Article four, section three of the Constitution not withstanding, such statehood will be effective, for those island nations accepting the invitation and uniting together, on the date two years after this article becomes a valid part of the Constitution. [ Dateline December 13, 1998, SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) In a vote aimed at resolving a century-long debate on the Caribbean island's status, Puerto Ricans narrowly edged out statehood in favor of remaining a commonwealth of the United States ]

Though not an "Imperial" nation with the goals for world expansion that other nations have expressed throughout recorded history, the United States has at times taken possession of or control over countries to protect them. However good the intentions that precipitate the possessing of other nations, the foolishness of bureaucracy always makes a mess of the relationship, with the people of the possessed land becoming either hateful of the U.S. or dependent upon her. Usually both. In either case the relationship does no good for the people of those lands, and the responsibility places a huge burden upon the resources of the people of the U.S. No nation should be a possession, commonwealth or protectorate of the United States. Those lands near our shores in and around the Caribbean should be offered an opportunity the choose to form together as a state united with the U.S., and should be let alone if their people chooses to forego statehood.