If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be

[Mikestone8]

Off the top of my head, three

1) a) The Supreme Court of the United State shall consist of a Chief Justice and not more than eight Associate Justices.

b) If, in the opinion of three-fourths of the Justices, any Justice shall through age or infirmity be no longer able to carry out the duties of his office, the Justices so affirming shall so inform the Senate and House of Representatives in writing under their signatures, and any Justices dissenting from this shall have thirty days in which to similarly notify the Senate and House of Representatives of their dissent. In the event that the Senate and House shall, by two-thirds of votes cast, concur with such opinion, the Justice shall cease to hold office and a successor be appointed as in the case of his death or retirement, but if such majorities be not obtained he shall continue in office.

[no packing allowed, but a provision to remove Justices who go senile]



2) Amendments to this Constitution shall have affect upon their ratification, not more than seven years after their submission to the States, by three-fourths thereof. But no ratification shall be made after the expiry of seven years from said submission, any such ratifications being held illegal and void.


[no more nonsense about Amendments getting resurrected 200 years after they were proposed]


3) No law of the United States or of any State shall take effect until the legislative body enacting it shall have also enacted how the revenue shall be raised for any expenditure necessary for its execution, which monies shall be paid by the United States in the case of a United States Law, and by the State in the case of a State Law.


[no "unfunded mandates". Whichever level of government mandates the expenditure also pays the bill for it]

[Mikestone8]

My proposed amendments would clarify the bounds in which contested elections and presidential  In the absence of a provision to declare the winner of the popular vote the winner of the presidency, I'd like some clarification about what happens in the result of a contested election. Right now a lot of things are completely unclear. If a state doesn't certify its electors, leaving nobody with 270, does the election get kicked to the House, or does the candidate with the majority of certified electors get sworn in? There are compelling arguments on both sides, but this is completely an open question. The method of resolving contested elections, with the House voting as state delegations, is absolutely bonkers and is a time bomb waiting to go off.

It's not all that open. The Constitution required a majority of the total number of Electors to choose the POTUS. So if a state fails to choose nay, then a majority of the ones who have been chosen is sufficient.