Bad Idea of the Week — 3 Constitutional Amendments

OK, it’s time for another one of my bad ideas. I’ve doodled recreationally
from time to time with "dream" Constitutional amendments. A few articles
I’ve read in the past week have me wanting to doodle again. At Cato Unbound,
James
Buchanan has an essay asking what three Constitutional amdendments would you
propose. Also, Moderate
Voters linked to an
article at TomPaine.com that challenges our winner-take-all election system,
suggesting that multiple representatives drawn from superdistricts would be
a better way to populate Congress than the system we have today.

So, I offer three dream amendments.

Right-to-Privacy Amendment

1. The right of an individual’s privacy in his or her private and faimily life,
home, and communications is essential to the well-being of a free society, and
shall not be denied by the United States or by any State except to the minimum
extent required for the protection of public safety.

2. The right of a United States citizen to the protection of personal data
concerning him or her shall not be not be denied by the United States or by
any State.

3. Data collected on a citizen of the United States shall be processed fairly
for specified purposs and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned
or some other legitimate basis laid down by law.

4. The right of a United States citizen to access data which has been collected
concerning him or her shall not be denied by the United States or by any State
except to the minimum extent required for the protection of public safety.

5. The right of a United States citizen to have errors in data which has been
collected concerning him or her shall not be denied by the United States or
by any State.

Yes, that draws upon language in the proposed European Constitution. It’s produced
some policies/regs that are a pain to implement, but I still think it’s a good
idea. The actions and words coming from both sides of the aisle are enough to
make one believe that perhaps privacy should be an enumerated right, rather
than one protected by the vaguaries of the ninth amendment.

Fiscal Responsibility / Balanced Budget Amendment

1. Beginning two years after ratification of this Article, Congress shall approve
no budget for the United States Government where total outlays exceed total
anticipated receipts, unless this requirement is waived by three-quarters of
the whole number of each House of Congress by rollcall vote.

2. Beginning seven years after ratification of this Article, total outlays
for any five consecutive fiscal years shall not exceed total receipts for those
fiscal years unless funding for any such excess expenditure has been provided
for by the most recent budget of the United States Government, or unless approved
by three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress by rollcall vote.

3. The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not
be increased, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide
by law for such an increase by a rollcall vote.

4. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress
a proposed budget for the United States Government in which total outlays do
not exceed total receipts. However, for any fiscal year, Congress may waive
this requirement when approved by three-fifths of the whole number of each House
of Congress.

5. No bill to increase revenue as measured on a per-capita basis shall become
law unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each House by rollcall
vote.

6. No bill to decrease revenue as measured on a per-capita basis shall become
law while there is debt of the United States outstanding unless approved by
three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress by rollcall vote,
or unless the bill contains a provision to eliminate or reduce the revenue decrease
in the event of other, unanticipated revenue shortfalls.

7. The Congress shall enforce and implement this Article by appropriate legislation,
which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts. Congress shall establish
appropriate criminal punishment for the crime of intentional deception through
estimation of outlays and receipts.

8. Beginning two years after ratification of this article, Congress shall approve
no outlays by the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Program, Federal Disability
Insurance Program, Medicaid, or their successors unless forecasted receipts
in support of those programs are at least equal to forecasted outlays.

9. No agency of the United States Government may lease or transfer ownership
of property of the United States Government without compensation reflecting
the fair market value of that property, unless such a lease or transfer is made
to the government of one of the several States or Territories of the United
States.

10. Congress shall make no law which embraces more than one subject, that subject
to be expressed in the title. All acts which repeal, revive or amend former
laws, shll recite in their caption, or otherwise, the title or substance of
the law repealed, revived or amended.

11. For purposes of this Article, total receipts shall include all receipts
of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays
shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for
repayment of debt principal.

That draws upon the Balanced Budget Amendment proposed in the Contract With
America, with a few provisions added to address the problems of approving tax
cuts without corresponding cuts in spending / increases in other funding, of
the administration intentionally misleading Congress about the magnitude of
proposed spending, of sneaking tax or spending provisions in bills of incongruous
subjects, and of "giveaways" of government property.

Amendment Concerning Membership in the House and Senate, the Electoral
College, and the Conducting of Federal Elections

I’m not going to attempt wording here…this post is already long enough, and
this idea has a snowball’s chance in hell of actually passing… but I’d like
to see changes made in Congress along these lines:

1. House of Representatives

1a. House is made up of 2n members, drawn from n districts
(n set by Congress, but at least 217).

1b. House districts shall be designated after each decennial census, such that
the voting population within each district is as equal as practical, and such
that the length of the boundaries of each district is as small as possible.
District boundaries may cross state lines.

1c. House members are elected for two-year terms.

1d. To get on the ballot for the House, you need a petition signed by 1000
registered voters from that district.

1e. An individual may run in multiple districts; residency is not required.

1f. A voter may cast a vote for one House candidate each election.

1g. For each Congressional district, the candidate who obtains the greatest
number of votes in that district is elected. All remaining vacancies are filled
from the remaining candidates who have the greatest number of votes.

1h. If a mid-term vacancy arises, the highest vote-getter who was not elected
is tapped to fill the vacancy.

2. Senate

2a. Senate is made up of 2n members, drawn from the n states.

2b. Senate members are elected for six-year terms, with one third of the membership
up for election each two-year election cycle.

2c. Ballot access requirements are quivalent to those for the House.

2d. For one-third of the states, the highest vote-getter from that state
is elected.

2e. All remaining vacancies are filled from the remaining candidates who
have the greatest number of votes.

2f. If a mid-term vacancy arises, the highest vote-getter who was not elected
is tapped to fill the vacancy until the next Senate election.

3. Electoral College

3a. Voters shall select one elector to represent the state they reside in,
and voters shall elect one elector to represent the congressional district
they reside in.

3b. The candidate who receives the greatest number of electoral votes is
elected President.

3c. If the individual elected to the Presidency dies before inauguration,
the individual elected Vice-President is succeeds to the Presidency, and the
Senate candidate who received the greatest number of votes in the most recent
election is elevated to Vice-President

4. Conduct of Federal Elections

4a. No voting system shall be used in a Federal election unless it produces
a voter-verifiable paper record of each vote cast, to be used in the event
that an election result is disputed and a recount is required.

4b. "The right to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United
States, any State, or any other public or private person or entity, except
that the United States or any State may establish regulations narrowly tailored
to produce efficient and honest elections." (plagiarized from a voting
rights amendment proposed earlier this year)

4c. Voters may register to vote at the polling place on the day of election.

4d. States shall make a good faith effort to advise registered voters by
mail of the location of their polling place.

4e. Any registered voter may cast a vote in any government-funded primary
election for federal office. Party membership may not be a prerequisite in
casting a vote for a particular race.

OK, so that turned out to be longer than I had hoped. However, this does get
at several of my gripes with how Congresscritters are elected, including the
end of gerrymandering, facilitating a little churn, weakening the two-party
duopoly, and reducing the incentive to pass porkbarrel measures…all while
preserving the idea that everyone should have a local representative in Congress,
and that small states should be guaranteed some representation in Congress.
Add in some protections to address the transition to the electronic voting age,
and to bar some of the games allegedly played in the past couple of Presidential
elections, and voilá!

I’d have thrown in some campaign finance items…but I’m not well-versed enough
to know what I would want to see done in that regard. Besides, this amendment
outline is already wordy enough, and too unlikely to pass anyway.

The key to the Congressional scheme is the idea that even in the face of a system where half the congresscritters represent geographic areas, while half are at-large…each voter may vote for only one candidate. In districts that overwhelmingly lean towards one party or another, perhaps that party will field two candidates. In parts of the country where support for a particular party is lean, perhaps they run one or two candidates spread across several districts, in order to gain a seat by virtue of the volume of votes cast. A third party (e.g. Liberarians or Greens) or a special interest group (e.g. the religious-conservative wing of the GOP, or an organization representing a particular minority) might field a half-dozen candidates spread across many districts each.

Yes, I do preserve the Electoral College in my scheme. I agree with the idea that seeking to have a candidate with broad geographic appeal is a good thing, and that a simple popular vote risks creating a situation where a candidate with very strong support in only one part of the country would win versus candidate with a broader base of support. However, I would like to see an end to the idea of winner-take-all at the state electoral vote level, if only to reduce the phenomenon of elections being decided/focused on a handful of “battleground” states.

Also, I did briefly think about incorporating a requirement for preferential voting, however I think my scheme is complicated enough, and should adequately address the problem of artificial polarization of Congress.