September 11th – Remembering All That Was Lost

September 11th - Remembering All That Was Lost

As we all remember September 11th, it’s important to not only remember the horrific events of that day, but what it meant to us as people, as a country, and as a world.

September 11th hits me the hardest in this way, for a brief flash I saw the very best of humanity. When the horrific events unfolded I not only saw my fellow Americans, by my fellow humans putting aside differences to come together in one worldwide call of humanitarianism. I saw true outpouring of human love and empathy from all corners of this globe. I am still awestruck to this day of the potential I saw in humanity during this brief flash of remarkable humanity.

However, over the days, months, and years that followed I watched as the goodness of humanity faded through fear. I watched bigotry explode from our hate. I watched evil flourish as we let our worst traits take over. It became ok to take advantage of each other. A smile on our faces as we let our hate, anger, and fear take over while we deceived ourselves through false justifications.

Now I look at this world almost two decades later, I can see how the worst of us has shaped us. I can see how our fear defeats us. I can see how our bigotry turns our family, friends, and neighbors into our enemies. I see how we use hate to justify our amorality. I see too many embracing the worst parts of us for their own personal gain.

That’s why I find September 11th so hard. I see how we squandered that glimpse of goodness. Instead we allowed the hate, fear, anger, and despair into our lives. In doing so we have made this world an uglier place then it was on September 10, 2001.

In my view, terror won that day. Hate’s still winning. Fear has had a grip on us for nearly an entire generation. Along with those lost, we need to also remember the lessons lost.

This is not to say that we humans are lost. We can choose hope over fear. We can choose understanding over anger. We can choose compassion over bigotry. We can choose peace over violence. We can choose good over evil.

When you take a moment to remember September 11th. Remember that flash of goodness and humanitarianism. We can choose to shine again like we did that fateful day, every day.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

I Think Less Of You

This saying of “Think less of you.” has been around for a bit over a year, but it really does sum up my sadness and helps to tamp down the ager I feel towards others. I think it sums up my thoughts on our political opponents and current situation.

Think Less of You Shareable Image Meme

Text Version of Think Less of You

I am not mad at you that Clinton lost. I am unconcerned that we have different politics. And I don’t think less of you because you vote one way and I vote another.

No …

  • I think less of you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him.
  • I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him.
  • I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country.
  • I think less of you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board.

It isn’t your politics that I find repulsive. It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty. You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget. So, no … you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever.

Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust you that will stick with me long after this election.

Feel free to share this. #resist #persist

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Donald Trump Grabs America

Trump Grabs America – 45th President


Trump grabs America in a black and white version for scaled readability. 

Please Post These Everywhere – Trump Grabs America

Donald Trump Sworn in as America's 45th President of the United States

Use this, and any other means at your disposal, as a form of non-violent protest. Now, more than ever, the citizens of this country need to stand up and shout out against evil, corruption, sexism, misogyny, sexual assault, bullying, anti-intellectualism and general lack of morality that is sweeping into acceptance with Donald Trump’s win. His swearing in is an all too real sign of the trouble that America, and the world, is in. 

Our world just got grabbed by an absolutely awful individual. He now has the power to actually ruin it instead of just being a stain on it. So fight to take it back. Anyway you can.

Post this image everywhere on social media. It is a small step. But we must keep telling the world and those in power that we are not ok with a president that was just sworn in even though he was caught on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women. 

We can’t continue down this path. 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

What the world thinks of Trump Voters

This great video sums up the thoughts of so many voters that were shocked that Donald Trump won. Things have somehow progressed well beyond basic policy ideas. They have transcended into basic human rights and decency. This quick video does a great job of summing up our thoughts.



Credit: Tess Rafferty.
Video shared by Occupy Democrats

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Fight the Hate

People Politico

We must all come together and fight the hate that has taken root! Add this profile picture to all your social media. Share it with your friends and tell the world you will not sit idly by while hate takes over. 

Fight The Hate!

Fight the Hate

Do not sit by and let America repeat the horrific mistakes of the past. Fight the Hate. Fight the Fear. Call it out and do not tolerate it anymore. Our complacency has let it take root. 


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Time to Toss the Turd-tastic Trump

Time to Toss the Turd-tastic Trump - Political Poem By a Pondering PunditThere is a nasty little foul orange turd,

that throws childish fits and wants to be heard.

It had such aspirations, a president to be,

which terrified most people, even across the sea!

It shouted, insulted, degraded, and mocked,

and people all over gasped and balked.

Unfortunately now, we see that few,

thought the turd was great, a leader they’d choose.

The hate, the loathing, the anger that churned,

so awful and mean, it should have be spurned.

The turd it’s terrible, an unstable king,

and worse, it’s not a bright little thing.

Its grotesque tiny hands, its swoop for a hat,

some people want a leader like that.

It boggles the mind, more than a little,

that this slimy turd didn’t make these folks piddle.

Tricked by anger it made some people think,

a turd like this wouldn’t make us sink.

But the lack of reality and wealth of lies,

all it really does is attract the flies.

This silly little turd we took as a joke,

is a step away from making us choke.

The turd is a problem and way too serious,

the path that lead here is far too curious.

It’s time we do what we know is right,

grab the moist towelette and wipe.

No longer a joke, understand the danger,

then flush this nasty turd and dispose of anger.

It might be a nutty, interesting turd,

but it is something we shouldn’t have heard.

So flush that thing, and wash your hands clean,

of that which should not have been seen.

Find a leader on the ticket that’s true,

or write one in, it could even be you!

Then take a breath of clean fresh air,

and forget about the turd with fake hair.

So get out and vote, then on with your day,

the stink of the turd will soon go away.

Talk to your friends, your family, your spouse,

about how you banished the turd from your house.

No more hate, anger, or bigotry here,

we are all now better without its fear.

Now be a good person and make the right choice,

your most powerful weapon is a good moral voice!

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Primary or Caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday

Head out to vote in the primary or caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday. It is vitally important! Our power lies in our participation in the political process. One of the places where our vote still holds a huge amount of sway is in primaries and caucuses. It is arguably the place where the individual voter’s vote still has real, tangible power. Use it!

Find out how and where here:

In some years the differences in candidates for president for each party is minimal. This year is not the case. In fact, the democratic candidates are remarkably different. This difference is will mean whether we have a chance to fix and correct our political system or if we remain in the embarrassing and dysfunction quagmire that is our corrupt political process and government functionality.

Here is the evidence that shows their differences and why voters need to mobilize and caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday.

Hillary Clinton & Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday Comparison

Issue Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders
Super PAC Contributions $64 Million

(Many large corporate & banks)



TPP Changed from Support to Opposed

(Supported until started Campaign)

Keystone Pipeline Recently Opposed

(No Stance for a Long Time)

Campaign Contributions 18% Small/82% Large

(Corporations & Banks)

71% Small/29% Large

(Small Business and Individuals)

Presidential Polls against GOP GOP Consistently Wins

(She is very divisive)

Consistently Beats GOP

*Data from:

Primary or Caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday - Bernie Sanders vrs Hillary Clinton

*Chart from:

Primary or Caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday
As demonstrated in by the data above Senator Bernie Sanders has a much more progressive agenda with hopes and plans to continue to improve America. Bernie Sanders is pushing for further steps to tackle every major issue.

Much of what Hillary Clinton proposes is to stick with much of what we already have, such as healthcare and energy policies.

When looking at each candidate’s stance on issues both in the past and present, their outlined plans for American policy, and the drive they have to make a difference in the coming years the choice is clear.

  • Bernie Sanders is the best choice to advance American policy in meaningful ways demonstrated by his decade’s long history of fighting against the corporate takeover of America.
  • Bernie Sanders clearly has the majority of American’s people’s best interest in mind demonstrated by his empathy and vigor through demonstrating for civil rights.
  • Bernie Sanders is the best choice to bridge the gap between people in America demonstrated by his ability to compromise and find middle ground on long lists of passed legislation.

Vote or Caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday

Please take a little time out of your day today and head out to your local Primary or caucus and vote. It is a rich and rewarding experience. Your vote holds significant weight in the outcome of who will end up being the Democratic nominee for president.

Ask those around you if they would like to join you. Make a night out of! It will be fun and it is so very important to be involved in our democratic process. If we don’t use our democracy, we just might lose our democracy.

So get out there today and caucus for Bernie Sanders Super Tuesday!

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

Climate Change Denial is Insisting the World is Flat

Climate Change Denial Must Be Addressed

Climate Change Denial is Insisting the World is Flat

Have you become a victim of climate change denial? Find out what it is and how you can learn to spot climate change denial propaganda.

Have we missed out on some of the important information, stories, experiments, studies, and catastrophes? There are so many events that have contributed to the indisputable fact, humans are changing the environment.

You can look at the many places in nature humans have made differences. With each road we create, we kill animals and block their paths. With each city we change the temperature and wind flow in the area, and with each piece of trash we throw away we pollute a little more of our planet. These are all climate change. Humans do this. Our combined human race does huge amounts of damage every day.

But don’t ask me, I’m just trying to make the world a little better. I’m not a climate scientist. I’m not a politician. I’m just an American trying to make America better. However, at this pace we are ignoring and exacerbating the problem. This has to stop for us to have any chance at a future.

Like I said, don’t ask me. Ask these thousands of scientists, organizations, and nations that can teach you what you need to know to make a better world. Let’s gets things started with a few massive collections of climate change data.

Climate Chance Consensus

Scientific American



Environmental Protection Agency


Things don’t really get any more black and white in our modern world. With overwhelming consensus we are observably and repeatedly damaging the one place we have to live. We must do something about it. We must make the change now for us to have any hope for humanities future. Climate change denial is one great social diseases we have the knowledge and power to cure. Climate change denial must be addressed immediately.

If you have any other great sources of scientific information regarding climate change please post them below.




VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Government Employees Bear the Burden of Cutbacks

Government Employees Bear the Burden of CutbacksWhen I was in elementary school, and teachers would ask us what we wanted to be when we grew up, the answer was usually “an astronaut!” and then we would get asked what ELSE we would want to be in case the space career didn’t work out. Then the responses were fire fighter, police officer, or teacher.  All of which are government employees. When we got older and realized there were a whole lot more choices out there, it was still understood that a job with the government would provide good pay, good benefits, and a good future with job security.

Government Employee Salaries

Things have definitely changed. A career in law enforcement and elementary school teaching will require a degree and hold average salaries of $52,374  $53,842, respectively. The average salary for a fire fighter is $43,208, with need for specialized training and/or a degree.

The benefits that used to accompany public sector jobs can no longer be taken for granted. When the government needs to save money fast, they tend to aim for the low-hanging fruit: government employees. Whether they are laid off, their wages are frozen for years, or they are furloughed, it is now understood that government employees tend to be the collateral damage of political maneuverings.

Overlooking Government Employees

Taxpayers tend to forget that a large part of their taxes go toward paying government employees’ salaries, who may be sharing in their own hardships when times get tough. However, chasing away talented employees from government jobs is a recipe for substandard service, as is demoralizing those who choose to stay.

When companies defend the exorbitant pay of their CEO’s, they say they need to offer these large paychecks to stay competitive and attract the best talent. It’s really the same with any job: in order to attract and keep good employees, companies need to pay them well, offer good benefits, and make it a job that people will want to do.

Now consider police officers. We have municipalities that can’t afford enough officers for the number of people they are expected to serve and protect, and those they can afford won’t get raises so governments can meet their budgets. What kind of morale do officers have when they cannot get the equipment they need, are overworked, overstretched, and haven’t seen a decent raise in years? What happens when the people they are sworn to serve and protect do not support them on a basic level of fair compensation for what is expected of them? Don’t we want to attract the best candidates to this career?

Teachers’ starting salaries are terribly low, yet the competition is fierce. The profession attracts those who want to make a difference to children. There is always talk about how a good teacher makes a difference in a child’s life and a bad teacher can be devastating. Imagine the candidate pool if a teacher’s salary would actually be enough to begin to pay back a graduating student’s loans? Imagine school districts with budgets big enough to afford more teachers to make the student to teacher ratio more favorable?

Government Employees Keep America Going

When we worry about pollution, what is in our food, about climate change, about our health, do we realize our taxes go to pay salaries for employees of the EPA and FDA? That scientists make breakthroughs due to funding from government grants? Private companies cannot regulate or provide oversight to private companies. Oversight must be done by a neutral party, and the government is the only choice to administer to the public good.

No matter the political affiliation, it is important to remember the people who may be affected most by government cuts ultimately is ourselves: standing in line at the DMV, sitting dazed at the side of the road after a car accident, scared and confused after a robbery, sitting in a restaurant wondering when it was last inspected by the Health Department, and sitting with our child’s teacher at parent-teacher conferences.  When we cut taxes, to the detriment of government employees, we are hurting ourselves.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Citizens United Constitutional Amendment – Open Letter

Citizens United Amendment, An Open Letter to CongressMemorandum


Speaker of the United States House of Representatives John Boehner

Minority Leader of the United States House of Representative Nancy Pelosi

United States Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Current)

United States Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Current)


Legislation to Create a Constitutional Amendment to Address the Supreme Court Ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Committee (FEC)


The purpose of this open memorandum is to give the addressed audience the background behind one of the Supreme Court’s most critical rulings in determining how political speech can and will be voiced in the United States, as well who will be afforded this microphone for such speech. It is important to know background behind the legislation that was created that led to this decision, the fallout in terms of the tremendous influx and rise of corporate and individual contributions to super PACs and the infinite rise of dark contributions that are without disclosure, identity, or known motive to become prevalent in today’s political marketplace.

The Supreme Court has afforded individual rights to corporations throughout its existence but it, nor the legislative branch of the Unites States government have taken steps to clearly outline and define legal rights that should be afforded to corporations and which rights are exclusively endowed to actual human citizens. A constitutional amendment is the most clear path to defining and finally making a clear distinction and protect the liberties of citizens by provide corporations with adequate legal recognition and protection. A constitutional amendment is not an act of small proportions and will take both sides of the isle to find common ground in order to find a solution to the removes the court’s interpretation of whom and what are covered under specific amendments. Though it will be tough, it is vital to the preservation of the individual citizen to make such distinctions and definitions clear and a permanent within the United States Constitution.

Background in Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Committee

Citizens United Constitutional Amendment Open Letter to CongressIn 2002 the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) also known as the McCain Feingold Campaign Reform Act was signed into law by then President George W. Bush (BCRA, n.d.). The purpose of the bipartisan legislation was to address campaign financing in five main areas: soft money contributions and regulations, reform of electioneering communication from non-candidate organizations and individuals, the prohibiting of corporations and labor unions from using funds from their general treasuries to fund electioneering communications, the placement of an exemption for nonprofit organizations was implemented to allow these groups to use general treasuries to fund electioneering communications, and the final major subject addressed in the legislation is the placement of coordination restrictions and disclosure policies for advertising (BCRA, n.d.). The law almost immediately saw legal challenges spear headed by Senator Mitch McConnell and the National Rifle Association (NRA) whom both challenged the constitutionality of the legislation and ultimately the Supreme Court heard several challenges directed at specific sections of the act shortly after the bill became law and in all instances affirmed the legislation or pushed the argument back to be argued once the law is applied (BCRA, n.d).

Citizens United is nonprofit corporation that states is “dedicated to educating the American public about their rights and the government” and in the 2008 presidential election cycle produced a expressively conservative political ninety minute movie that attacked then Senator Hillary Clinton whom was running for the Democratic presidential nomination (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Docket No. 08-205), 2009). As noted in the BCRA a ban on direct financing of electioneering communications and also required that such advertising have disclaimer and disclosure information provided to identify where the money for the advertising came from (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Docket No. 08-205), 2009).  Citizens United sought to have these provisions of the BCRA challenge and on March 24, 2009 the Supreme Court heard oral arguments challenging the BCRA and the court was faced then with four overarching questions in their decision: should electioneering communication as defined and restrictions imposed in the BCRA be upheld, are the disclosure requirements within the BCRA “overly burdensome and fail a strict scrutiny test as-applied to The Movie”, determination if The Movie fell into the category of a “clear plea for action to vote”, and whether or not The Movie was considered an advertisement which then would make it subject to regulations within the BCRA(Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Docket No. 08-205), 2009).

In January 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that “the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections” (Liptak, 2010). The court was split five to four in their ruling with the majority stating that the government cannot and should not be permitted to limit political speech while the decent stated that this ruling will lead to the money pouring into political advertising and will ultimately undermine democracy in the United States (Liptak, 2010). This ruling not only struck down the key provisions within the BCRA (that had already been ruled and upheld by the court in 2003) it was constitutional to place restrictions on corporate and union spending for political advertising and also overruled a 1990 Supreme Court decisions that had found it constitutional to implementation restrictions on corporate spending in political campaigns (Liptak, 2010). Writing for the majority Justice Kennedy “When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought […] This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves” (Liptak, 2010). The court in the majority decision also gave a more subtle indication within their ruling that “independent contributions could not corrupt (Hasen, 2012). In part of a twenty minute decent from the bench Justice John Paul Stevens stated “the majority had committed a grave error in treating corporate speech the same as that of human beings” (Liptak, 2010). The ruling fell across political lines with the five conservative justices backing Citizens United and the liberal justices descending leaving a huge loophole for political spending poured into the political spectrum and having a congress as divided as the courts resolution progress on creating a resolution to the action taken by the court seems unlikely.

Citizens United Ruling and the Rise of the Super PAC

Though in the 1976 Supreme Court ruling, the justices ruled that an individual could spend unlimited amounts of money to advertise for or against candidates, this money had to be used by the individual and could not be given to a political action committee or PAC (Hasen, 2012). Since the individuals would have to declare in the advertising that they had paid for it, few individuals chose to make individually funded advertising even though it was ruled to be legal (Hasen, 2012). Prior to the Citizens United ruling PACs had been limited to five thousand dollars in individual contributions and corporations and unions were forbidden from making any contributions to these groups (Hasen, 2012). Following the Citizens United ruling the 527 groups (named for the section of nonprofit tax standing under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code they fall under) claimed they could take unlimited funds from not only individuals but also corporations and unions as they were not considered PACs under the FEC’s definition of PACs and led to the rise of the super PAC that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money (Hasen, 2012).

Looking only at presidential elections since BCRA was enacted, so called super PACs had the following spending activities : 2004 – $14,193,530 / 2008: $37,509,249 / and following the Citizens United decision in 2010 the 2012 spending jumped to over a billion dollars with $308.7 million having no disclosure at all (Hasen, 2012) (Outside Spending, n.d.). In looking at this current year’s midterm election super PAC, 527 and 501C spending based on FEC daily updates through November 16, 2014 nearly five-hundred and sixty million dollars with only three-hundred and forty million having full disclosure, it should also be noted that the super PAC is by far and away the largest receiver of dollars and spending on electioneering communications (Outside Spending, n.d.). This kind of expansion of corporate personhood affording free speech to such entities only act to mute the individual voice that the First Amendment was designed to protect, not to mention the corruption that can only follow such unbridled spending.

Corporate Citizenship in the United States Supreme Court

Citizens United Supreme CourtSince the inception of the United States there have been at least nine Supreme Court decisions beyond the Citizens United case that have weighed in to classify companies and corporations individuals in the eyes of the law. The first rights to be decided by the court revolved around the citizen classification and jurisdictional questions. In 1809 in the Bank of the United States vs. Deveaux as federal and state jurisdictions were still being established, the defendant argued that since corporations are not people, they could not bring a case to federal court and the court agreed meaning that corporations could only have legal standing in federal courts if all shareholders or at least one of the opposing party lived in the same state (Park, 2014). In 1844, it had become apparent that the 1809 ruling had put corporations primarily out of reach of the federal court system and ruled in Louisville, Cincinnati, and Charleston Railroad vs. Letson that “corporations were “citizens” of the states where they incorporated” (Park, 2014). Marshall vs. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in the Supreme Court’s 1853 ruling further defined the corporations as citizens as applied to jurisdiction of the courts and outlined that corporations did not enjoy the same constitutional rights as real people thus making shareholders to be considered citizens of the companies home state making it easier for federal court proceedings to be brought by and against corporations (Park, 2014).

Following the United States Civil War and the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment the Southern Pacific Railroad in County of Santa Clara vs. Southern Pacific Railroad stated that as corporations are citizens it was illegal for the county to enact a tax specific to the railroad (Park, 2014). Though the court never eluded to the railroad being protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, the court reporter did include in the published notes of the ruling that the rights afforded under the Fourteenth Amendment and this adage would be used later citing this case as grounds to uphold corporate protection under the Fourteenth Amendment in 1898’s Smyth vs. Ames decision which protected corporations from property seizure without due process (Park, 2014). Hale vs. Henkel in 1906 continued to uphold a corporation’s protection under the Fourteenth Amendment but drew a distinction that companies were not protected from self-incrimination afforded under the Fifth Amendment (Park, 2014).

The distinction in regards to the Fifth Amendment was then back tracked in the Russian Volunteer Fleet vs. United States stating that foreign corporations are also protected from illegal government seizure and had an equal right fair treatment in the legal system (Park, 2014). In 1977 the right to shield a corporations from double jeopardy was also upheld in United States vs. Martin Linen Supply Company (Park, 2014). Finally in 2012, the Supreme Court ruled in Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby that corporations are also legally protected by the First Amendment’s freedom of religion (Park, 2014). Reviewing the consistent rulings of the court it has been made clear that corporations have been afforded rights traditionally viewed as individual citizen rights under the constitutions the blurring of a reality what are actual individual rights for a physical individual to poses and which are the rights afforded to both individuals and corporations as a pseudo citizen.

Constitutional Amendment

It is clear that a corporation, though founded by individuals with shareholders whom are also people, in everyday life no one would mistake a corporation for an actual living breathing human being. It can be seen why the courts have been put into the position of needing to adapt certain provisions of the constitution to adequately protect and litigate corporations but the time has come to clearly define the limitations of the corporations protections afforded by the constitution and limit the influence and power that such organizations can wheeled within the United States political system, especially if the corporation is looking for anonymity from the scrutiny of disclosure. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch of the United States government to look at over two centuries of court rulings that have gradually created the corporate citizen and the ambiguity that that has fashioned to know that it is time for action that is much less open to interpretation.

Such a movement to create the Twenty-eighth Amendment due to the process of a constitutional amendment will require that it be designed to show the benefit for corporations, the individual citizen, as well move above political partisanship that has created gridlock and division not only in Washington D.C. but across towns, families, and states over the past several decades. Compromise and partnership were the cornerstones of what this democracy were built on and must be rekindled in order to save the union from its own apathy in the face of critical problems.  A bipartisan recognition of the problem that exist needs to be made as a first step, though the reasons for such an identification do not need to be the same, the recognition of a problem must be a vital step in creating an understanding.

The writing of the legislation must also take bipartisan roots and impute should be actively solicited through congressional hearing from civil liberties organizations, as well, from corporate leadership and organization. By using congressional hearing as an avenue to create transparency around the process, any lobbyist for or against such an amendment should also be given the opportunity to present their case under oath in congressional hearings. Though there is no way legally to stop lobbyists from inserting pressure from their backers it would be admirable for all members of congress to take a pledge to only take official testimony from lobbyists if only on this one issue. By doing this the air of unofficial influence can be remediated in the process and deciding factors within the legislation can have known origins.

It would be best to use the tradition of starting a constitutional by providing a two thirds majority in both the United States House and Senate and then look to two thirds of the states for ratification. But if the gridlock that has prevented major legislation from moving through both chambers of congress cannot be overcome and in a time of instant information sharing and given the critical nature of this legislation, citizens should coordinate and call on their state legislatures to act in calling a constitutional convention which can be demanded with such passage by two thirds of the states in the union (Constitutional Amendment Process, n.d.). This subject has the potential to unify America in the address a problem that has been growing through the existence of the country and must be dealt with from the legislatures within this country instead of deferral to the courts whom are not elected or accountable to a constituency.


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
1 2 3 11