June 20th, 2011
12:26 PM ET

Is it time to update the U.S. Constitution?

We all know how Americans revere the Constitution, so I was struck by the news that tiny, little Iceland is actually junking its own Constitution and starting anew using an unusual - some would say innovative - mechanism.

The nation decided it needed a new Constitution and it's soliciting ideas from all of Iceland's 320,000 citizens with the help of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. This social media method has worked. Ideas have been flowing in. Many have asked for guaranteed, good health care. Others want campaign finance systems that make corporate donations illegal. And some just want the country to make shark finning illegal.

There is a Constitutional Council. It incorporates some of these ideas, rejects others, but everything is done in plain sight on the web. As one member of the Constitutional Council said, the document is basically being drafted on the Internet. 

Now, why do they need a new Constitution anyway? Well, after Iceland was crippled in recent years by the economic crisis, they all wanted a fresh start. And, anyway, they felt the document was old and outdated, drafted all the way back in 1944.

You might be tempted to say that Iceland doesn't have any reasons to be proud of its political traditions in the manner that the United States does. Well, think again.

Iceland is home to the world's oldest parliament still in existence, the Althing, set up in 930 A.D. The rocky ledge on which they gathered represents the beginnings of representative government in the world. So Iceland has reasons to cherish its history, and yet it was willing to revise it.

By contrast, any talk of revising or revisiting the U.S. Constitution is, of course, seen as heresy. The United States Constitution was, as you know, drafted in a cramped room in Philadelphia in 1787 with shades drawn over the windows. It was signed by 39 people.

America at the time consisted of 13 states. Congress had 26 senators and 65 representatives. The entire population was about one percent of today's number - four million people.

America was an agricultural society, with no industry - not even cotton gins. The flush toilet had just been invented.

These were the circumstances under which this document was written.

Let me be very clear here, the U.S. Constitution is an extraordinary work - one of the greatest expressions of liberty and law in human history.

One amazing testament to it is the mere fact that it has survived as the law of the land for 222 years.

But our Constitution has been revised 27 times.  Some of these revisions have been enormous and important, such as the abolition of slavery. Then there are areas that have evolved. For example, the power of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, is barely mentioned in the document. This grew as a fact over history.

But there are surely some issues that still need to be debated and fixed.

The electoral college, for example, is highly undemocratic, allowing for the possibility that someone could get elected as president even if he or she had a smaller share of the total national vote than his opponent.

The structure of the Senate is even more undemocratic, with Wisconsin's six million inhabitants getting the same representation in the Senate as California's 36 million people. That's not exactly one man, one vote.

And we are surely the only modern nation that could be paralyzed as we were in 2000 over an election dispute because we lack a simple national electoral system.

So we could use the ideas of social media that were actually invented in this country to suggest a set of amendments to modernize the Constitution for the 21st Century.

Such a plan is not unheard of in American history.

After all, the delegates in Philadelphia in 1787 initially meant not to create the Constitution as we now know it, but instead to revise the existing document, the Articles of Confederation. But the delegates saw a disconnect between the document that currently governed them and the needs of the nation, so their solution was to start anew.

I'm just suggesting we talk about a few revisions.

Anyway, what do you think? Should we do this? And if we were to revise the U.S. Constitution, what would be the three amendments you would put in?

Let us know in the comment thread and we'll post the best ones on the Global Public Square.

Post by:
Topics: GPS Show • Law • What in the World?

soundoff (2,350 Responses)
  1. Michal

    I think that the electoral college should be abolished. For the presidential election, the whole US should be one constituency – who gets the highest number of votes, wins. The President deals with issues on the federal (or global!) level and there is no justification, therefore, for each state to vote on behalf of all of its inhabitants. At the moment, the voting is not equal in principle (a vote in Wyoming carries more weight than a vote in California) and completely unfair in practice. It's not just that a candidate with less votes can win the office (Bush in 2000 – http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/ ). It's also that in states in which the majority votes Republican a Democratic voter (or vice versa) is discouraged because his vote will clearly make no difference.

    The second change I would suggest is to do a similar thing with the House of Representatives. Make the US one constituency and introduce proportional system. That would increase the importance of parties in the political system, but alsos lead to more parties than just the main two being represented. That would be promote constructive approach, since legislation would no longer be a zero-sum game. There would be parties that both Republicans and Democrats would be "allowed" to cooperate with. For example: If the Libertarian party got in, it would be acceptable for Repulicans to cooperate with the LP on taxes, regulations etc.; at the same time, it would be acceptable for Democrats to cooperate with the LP on social issues (gay marriage, ending the war on drugs etc.).

    Since I don't think it would be a good idea to do away completely with the federative nature of the US, I would keep the Senate as it is. Maybe the fillibuster could be weakened a bit (to 55 votes, give or take).

    June 23, 2011 at 1:15 pm | Reply
  2. Samuel

    1. An EQUAL REPRESENTATION AMENDMENT to the United States Constitution wherein political subdivisions based upon gender are superimposed on top of existing subdivisions based upon geography such that women would nominate and elect women to represent the female half of the population while men would nominate and elect men to represent the male half and legislative bodies are always exactly one half male and one half female. The proposed Equal Rights Amendment may have failed partially because it would have defied natural law by denying any distinction between the genders. Segregation is not the source of women’s problems. There never have been neighborhoods on the wrong side of the tracks that were predominately female. The doctrine that ‘separate is inherently unequal’ does not apply to women’s dilemma. When the ERA was in play, I wrote and self published a book on the subject, but only a handful were ever distributed. Equal and Distinct Genders can be obtained from me.

    2. An amendment to the U.S. Constitution to raise funds for public use by authorizing Congress to create a Socialized Recreational Drug Use System wherein the government produces, distributes and sells the drugs but is prohibited from promoting the use of them while the private sector cannot produce, distribute or sell them and therefore would not have a profit motive for promotion.

    3. An amendment to the United States Constitution that would implement James Madison’s proposal to ban members of the House of Representatives from immediately succeeding themselves, thus diminishing the effects of seniority in the House and obtaining side by side competitions in every District for every House and for every election, to realize the goals of term limits without sacrificing political talent.

    June 23, 2011 at 1:46 pm | Reply
  3. California Judy

    If we are going to improve our system, we should:
    1. Publicly finance campaigns (since when is a corporation a "person" with the right to "buy" a politician and how does money equal free speech!)
    2. Elect presidents by popular vote (and there is way too much power in the Senate for small states)
    3. Medicare for all (since insurance companies own Congress, the health care system won't get fixed there so
    let's talk about it here)

    June 23, 2011 at 2:08 pm | Reply
  4. Greg

    This is one of the more misleading propaganda pieces ever and CNN should be ashamed. His comments propagate a lie that the US is a democracy, we were never intended to be a democracy. There were balances built in our system. The senate was NEVER intended to be decided by the people. The senate was to be selected by the states and to represent the state. There's suppose to be three parties represented in our government. The Country, the States, and the People. all with checks and balances on each other so one doesn't get too powerful.

    The Electoral College is a system that keeps big population states from imposing it's will on smaller population states. This idea that because California has more people than, say, Kansas, they should have more pull is a lie and completely misleading. What works in LA is not always good for farming communities. This is why we have a balanced system. Our system was created so that the POTUS, representing the country, cannot take us too far down the path of his or her agenda. The people and the States could stop it, or limit it. But no, our states have no say, since they no longer select their senators the way it was intended the states have been stripped of their seat at the table and have lost their individual rights. Like it or not, that's the way the system SHOULD BE. If we continue going down this path that Zakaria suggests we're going to end up with a completely fractured country with states leaving the union, again. It's going to happen anyway and people like Zakaria will be sitting in that urban left lead areas wondering why everything is broken and why those states that left are succeeding.

    June 23, 2011 at 2:21 pm | Reply
    • Maciej

      Individual States would never be able to confront foreign powers like Chine lead by marxist-lininist party, traditionally imerialistic Russia, etc.

      Europe is desperatly, despiteits tribal history, trying to unite to face the growing powers.

      June 24, 2011 at 11:35 am | Reply
  5. David Kano

    Corporations should not have the rights of a human being. They are not people nor citizens. When they break the law the people that run them should pay, not just close the company & walk away.

    June 23, 2011 at 5:40 pm | Reply
  6. Race Jones

    The constitution doesn't need any updating. The people that are recommending this are CFR/Bilderberg globalist pieces of trash like Fareed Zakaria who want to destroy U.S. sovereignty and create their precious one world government. Well I've got news for you Fareed: that's not going to happen here in America. Slither back to the hole you came out of you snake.

    June 23, 2011 at 6:02 pm | Reply
  7. Thibault

    I completely agree. It is idiotic that people look at our constitution like a holy text. It's the best they could come up with at the time, and all the founding fathers made clear that a people shouldn't be held hostage to the previous generations' mindset. Times have changed and so the constitution needs to be updated and upgraded accordingly. The political system is obviously broken and this would be the first, major, necessary step to continue the great American experiment.

    June 23, 2011 at 6:07 pm | Reply
  8. KIRK

    ok i can listen to idiots on here or the founding fathers....UMMM YOU LOOSE AND GUESS WHAT DREAMERS ITS GOING TO STAY this way BECAUSE YOUR WORDS ARE WITHOUT VALUE COMPARED TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS thank god most of the country would laugh you out of the room or tar and feather you
    SO GO AHEAD RANT, WHINE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GET 2/3RDS OF STATES TO AGREE WITH YOU...LOL LOL...GOoD LUCK WITH THAT...LOL..LOL.LOL

    June 23, 2011 at 6:37 pm | Reply
  9. I like OLD Paper & Words !

    As I sit in my "Little Room" with "Shades Drawn" enjoying a Relaxing day of "Shark-finning" & the Sweet Soup it occurs to me....

    This Fool that "Thinks" he's Educated and has spewed this "Toilet Trout" has only added to his "Proggressive Resume" and 'Charmin-esq' "Diploma."

    His list of "Iceland's" Glory Forward is a Progressive/Liberal [Brown Acid] Wish List which is a Political & "Tactical "Give-a-Way" to the Agenda and the Stench of a Left-Wing Socialist and his "Toilet Knuckle" that cost him the veins in his eyes to "Expel" from his only intelligently working orifice. Rectee-O-Zakaria !

    I am sooo... Looking forward to the "Implementation" of his "Educated" Brain flautulance.

    Another fine [am]- Musing " Musing" from "Fareed [TANGO] 'Good People's Socialist' Zakaria"

    I wonder if there's a DNA link between He and "Interior Minister Rehman Malik," there Oral Prowness is Intertwined as the Helix.

    June 23, 2011 at 6:57 pm | Reply
  10. KIRK

    NICE DEBATE ON HERE IM A LITTLE SICK OF PEOPLE TRASHING THE VERY DOCUMENT THAT PROTECTS THEM but its protected speach its your right under our constitution but know this
    there are three things that i will fight,kill and die for and the constitution is one of them ..you want to change it then you get congress and the senate and 2/3rd of the states to ratify the amendment....its was made that way on purpose to stop idiotic things like whats being said on here I.E POPULAR VOTE good luck getting that past the small states...stay within constitutional guidelines you got no problem
    but try and rip it out or do it without following guidelines..
    THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT ME AND MILLIONS OF OTHERS IN THE GROUND BECAUSE IF YOU DIDN'T WE WOULD BURY YOU RIGHT ALONG WITH OSAMA,HITLER,AND THE OTHER Enemies of the Republic not a threat just a fact........oh yes one thing you might want to remember the military swears to defend the constitution not any one man or party against all Enemies foreign and domestic...its al right to talk and come up with ideas but changes will only come within the guidelines of that document PERIOD

    June 23, 2011 at 7:03 pm | Reply
  11. Eric

    A good amendment to the constitution would be to guarantee the right of every citizen to a complete, intact human body. This would mean an end to neonatal circumcision, both male and female. We live in a country where only under EXTREME circumstances would the genitals of baby girls be surgically altered, yet an entire component of the penis can be legally removed from baby boys for unfounded or very weak health reasons. A very large number of nerves are severed during male circumcision. The grossly unethical practice needs to end immediately, and adding an appropriate amendment to the constitution would be a highly effective way of doing so.

    June 23, 2011 at 8:33 pm | Reply
  12. Teresa*

    WE SHOULD NOT KEEP OUR ATTENTION ON HOLLYWOOD BUT ON THE FREEDOM OF AMERICA FROM THE ROTHSCHILDS & NEW WORLD ORDER ALONG WITH AGENDA 21 .........THE REPTILLIANS ARE IN OUR CHURCHES THEY HAVE INVADED OUR GOVERNMENTS & WE WILL PAY DEARLY WITH OUR FREEDOM IF WE STRAY FROM GODS LOVE SAY NO TO WARS & YES TO GODS LOVE DON'T LET THE DEVIL WIN ... PLEASE KEEP THE RIGHT TO BARE ARMS & MAKE LOTS OF BABIES AND FIGHT FOR OUR FREEDOMS ....... THE DEVIL IS ENJOYING AMERICAN LOSE THEIR LIVES IN A POINTLESS WAR THAT WAS BASED ON LIES ........ PLEASE PEOPLE ARE DYING ........LOVE THY BROTHER<3

    June 23, 2011 at 9:08 pm | Reply
  13. Teresa*

    HELL NO ITS NOT TIME TO UPDATE IT !!!!!!!!! WE LIKE OUR FREEDOMS JUST THEY WAY THEY ARE !!!!!
    TAKE YOUR NEW WORLD ORDER SOME WHERE ELSE ........... EVERYONE STOP WHAT YOUR DOING & LOOK UP AGENDA 21 IT WANTS TO WIPE OUT 98% OF THE WORLDS POPULATION AND KEEP THE PEOPLE @ A CONTROLLABLE STATE ......... PLEASE KEEP YOUR RIGHT TO BARE ARMS GO MAKE LOTS OF BABIES AND SAY NO TO FLU SHOT AND POISON FOOD GROW UR OWN FOOD & DON'T LET THE GOVERNMENT OPPRESS YOU WITH GAS PRICES MAKE YOUR OWN FROM BIO OIL MADE FROM VEGETABLE OIL SHOWS YOU HOW ON YOUTUBE ......... PLEASE EDUCATE YOUR SELF THE DEVIL IS LAUGHING WHILE WE KILL EACH OTHER SAY NO TO WARS AND YES TO GODS LOVE ........... PLEASE LOVE THY BROTHER ....... DEMON REPTILIANS ARE ALL AROUND YOU LOOK FOR A SLIT IN THEIR EYES ......... AND MORPHING SKIN!!!!!! OBAMAS IS THE QUEEN REPTILIAN PUPPET ..

    June 23, 2011 at 9:17 pm | Reply
  14. Red E. Forchange

    Re: US Constitution

    I read your article about constitutional change, amendment, etc..with great interest.
    It has served the US well for many years, and has shown many how a representative
    government can work for a long period of time. Unfortunately, the US experience, I
    believe, shows clearly that a new form, or at least major overhaul is needed. We
    are at a point in time where no matter what new “Head” we elect every 4 years, and
    regardless of their intent, or qualifications; they still become the Head of a hopelessly
    diseased body. A body that has become completely entrenched and bound by political
    favoritism, contributions, influence and legal corruption. A government “of the elite”,
    by “the elite”, for “the elite”. A government system and politico that most closely resembles
    one of the “reality TV” shows that now plague our country’s psyche.
    I have always believed that one should not complain, unless you have a solution to propose. It is clearly time for “Direct Democracy”. Not the version that was hastily implemented in California (and most politicians against it would use California as a failed example), but a version modeled after Switzerland’s, which has served that country so well over the years. It is a mature country, without debilitating politics, and a country that decided long ago to keep its nose out of other countries business, where it shouldn’t be. A mature population, (as the US appears to be) one with more knowledge (whether provided by the internet/media or not), is ready to have a say in what laws are proposed, passed and eliminate the incapacity/inability of our current bevy of legislators.

    Secondly, our legal system needs significant overhaul. We need to replace the “for profit”
    legal system that only the rich can afford. This is true at both the federal, state, and local levels. A sitting judge is one of the most powerful people in the country. They are as prejudiced, biased, inept and jaundiced as the next person. How many people have we convicted, that were innocent. How many have been the subject of theft, or another crime, and could not afford justice, or get equal treatment under the law. A judge decides what case to hear (or not), and what evidence to allow (or not). The jury hears a summarization of that, and in many cases, the decision is already determined; limited or influenced. Two lay people should sit aside every judge, to hear the cases submitted, evidence presented, and preside over each case. It keeps all parties honest, and it puts people back to work. Trail lawyers have had such an adverse negative effect on what can be included and what cannot over the years, that getting a conviction is near impossible. They are sucking the lifeblood out of our country.
    We need equality in our justice system, just as we do in our political system.

    The people of this country are intelligent enough to make correct decisions about what legislation we need, (if any) what should be proposed, and passed.
    We still need a “Head” and other legislators, as they have in Switzerland, but more individual control over legislation created; as well as enforcement. We need to cut out, or greatly reduce the overt, and disproportionate (to their value) influence that governments of other countries, and the leaders of “for profit” companies impose upon us, through our
    political system, and the politicos that run them. Our current system is not just failing,… it has failed.

    June 23, 2011 at 9:36 pm | Reply
  15. SomeNewRules

    1. End the war on drugs
    2. Prohibit government from instituting victimless crimes
    3. Abolish the "Miller Test" which regulates "obscenity" and prohibit the government from banning any speech unless it can be shown that the speech is directly harmful to someone.

    June 23, 2011 at 10:05 pm | Reply
  16. bannister

    Is it time for CNN to update Fareek Zukaria?

    YES.

    June 23, 2011 at 11:44 pm | Reply
  17. rushton

    I think we should be more focused on enforcing the constitution, not changing it. Fareed Zakaria is a traitor. A member of the Bilderberg Group, he sits on the Trilateral Commision and is a confidant of the CFR and the one and only Henry Kissinger (a notorious war criminal). Comparing our constitution to a world without toilets is evidence enough: Fareed Zakaria does not understand the ideals that our founding fathers fought for, and is only furthering an agenda that cares nothing for America or its people.

    June 23, 2011 at 11:58 pm | Reply
  18. Jack Duffy

    I think we should amend the constitution so that 1) a unanimous Supreme Court decision is required to overturn a US or state law, 2) the President has line-item veto on budget bills, but can be overridden by a majority vote provided each line item is voted on separately with the yeas & nays recorded on the journal, and 3) the people must approve of Congressional pay raises

    I think it's unbalanced that it takes five votes on the high court to declare a law unconstitutional, but then it takes a 2/3 super-majority in each house of Congress and 3/4 of the states to overturn these five unelected persons. This hasn't happened since the income tax nearly 100 years ago. If juries must be unanimous to declare one's guilt, the Supreme Court should have to be unanimous to nullify a law as unconstitutional.

    I would like to see the President have line-item veto like most governors do to help control wasteful spending.

    I don't think members of Congress should be able to vote in their own pay raises. I see this as a blatant conflict of interest. The people should have to approve their pay increases by a majority vote at the next election.

    June 24, 2011 at 12:21 am | Reply
  19. Arkadiy

    1. Add an amendment requiring a mandatory motion every 8 years (two presidential terms) for the congress to vote whether the constitution should be amended. This will provide for an opportunity for our country to determine whether any issues are important enough to be included in the constitution. The constitutional values should be preserved as time goes on, but also reflect our changing society.

    2. Change our governmental system to a direct democracy- eliminating the representative factor of the electoral college. One person should equal to one vote.

    3. Make lobbying unconstitutional. This goes in line of protecting the weight of every citizens' vote; one person should equal to one vote, reducing the influence of money and power.

    June 24, 2011 at 12:22 am | Reply
  20. KIRK

    A DIRECT DEMOCRACY WHAT A STUPID STUPID IDEA NO SMALL STATE WOULD EVER GO FOR IT
    one person one vote stupid idea founding fathers rejected it for a reason IT WOULD DISOLVE OUR UNION
    WE ARE A REPUBLIC AND YOU HAVE TO GET 2/3 OF STATES TO GO ALONG WONT EVER HAPPEN
    so forget it stupid stupid stupid idea democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner
    we do not need or want mob rule NO DEMOCRACY HAS EVER SURVIVED THEY DEDTROY THEM SELVES GO TO FRIGGIN SCHOOL MORONS we are a republic for a reason AND ITS GOING TO STAY THAT WAY

    June 24, 2011 at 2:30 am | Reply
    • Maciej

      So US democracy is not the greatest one in the wold afterall?

      Maybe for this reason when Americans wrote costitutions for Gemany an Japan after WWII they chose parlmantar sytem as oppose to replicating the US-congresaional one.

      June 24, 2011 at 11:09 am | Reply
      • kirk

        we are NOT a democracy moron WE are a constitutional republic democracy is nothing more than mob rule

        June 24, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
  21. Dex

    Why bother updating a worthless rag like the US constitution? It exists only to let the gun nuts hide behind it so they don't have to face the idea that the British aren't coming back and that you don't need a machine gun to hunt. And whats the point of the stuff on treaties, religion and rule of law if you're just going to keep torturing people or allowing civilians to fly drones that kill other civilians. Spit, blow, then wipe your ass and flush it.

    June 24, 2011 at 7:52 am | Reply
    • kirk

      A WORTHLESS RAG!!! YOU PEICE A CRAP you remind me of why i have a shotgun and a shovel

      June 24, 2011 at 2:34 pm | Reply
      • Dex

        Thanks for succinctly proving my point about guns and the lack of rule of law, dipshit. Thats EXACTLY why the constitution is a worthless rag.

        June 25, 2011 at 12:00 pm |
  22. Scott Alan

    Yes we do need to update the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, first and foremost, we need to repeal the 2nd Amendment and outlaw all guns, the need for a "well formed militia" has long since passed, bottom line is guns kill, and there is no need for individuals to own them

    June 24, 2011 at 9:55 am | Reply
    • kirk

      not going to happen punk !! you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers

      June 24, 2011 at 2:36 pm | Reply
  23. kirk

    Look if you have a whole world full of dictators and murderous despots do you go after them all at the same time

    Or do you take them down one at a time

    the feeble link to oil is a bit of a stretch as we get less than 2% from Libya

    And that argument doesn't seem to fit

    All of eastern Europe and the spread of democracy there

    Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania,the Philippines, panama, grenade, el Salvador, Afghanistan,kosovo,Serbia,Albania and you could include Iraq which like Libya is not a major supplier of oil to us

    Yes we tolerated many dictators during cold war as they where a lesser evil

    but the goals for democratic enlargement in descending order of importance:

    strengthening the community of major market democracies as the core of the international

    System, helping consolidate new democracies and market economies – especially in crucial states,

    countering the aggression of states hostile to market democracy

    The highest priority would be given to a core of America’s European and Asian democratic allies,

    followed by the new democracies in the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and Asia.

    Then would come the Americas and, across all regions, countries that could act as democratizing ‘beachheads’ by virtue of their regional

    Influence.

    Africa was last on list but if one gets an opening i.e. Libya to knock out a dictator that has been killing Americans for over 20 years

    Hey go for it

    To be honest even the most cynical person would have to be foaming at the mouth blind not to see what we have accomplished since the cold war ended

    More people have been freed than any other time ever in the history of the world

    the of course the dictators and authoritarian nuts jobs are screaming look look empire building but how many countries have we kept

    The answer is NONE we are the ONLY power in history that after we shed our blood for other we ask only for enough land to bury our dead

    And tell me friend in history how many countries have paid us back for their freedom

    the only thing they do is complain when we don't go in fast enough or complain when we do

    Like Mr. Blair said

    I just want to say this. I want to say it gently but I want to say it firmly: There is a tendency for the world to say to America,

    "the big problems of the world are yours, you go and sort them out," and then to worry when America wants to sort them out.

    Sometimes we have to fight other times we can use economic pressure to get this done but end the end democracy is spread

    for all people have the right to be free

    and those those who govern must be subject to the will of the people not the other way around only god is fit to be king

    man must answer to those he is temporaraly intrusted to govern

    more and more dictatorships once tolerated as a lesser evil during cold war

    are being swept aside finally their own people are waking up

    the democratic goverments wont look like ours it will reflect its own people

    June 24, 2011 at 2:47 pm | Reply
    • kirk

      THE POINT IS THIS CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC HAS SAVED THE WORLD TWICE AND WE WILL HAVE TO AGAIN LEAVE OUR CONSTITUITION ALONE WE HAVE PROBLEMS YES BUT WE HAVE WAYS TO CORRECT IT THROUGH THE AMENDMENT SYSTEM THE WORLD IS FULL OF EVIL AND OUR CONSTITUITION IS A LIGHT TO IT

      June 24, 2011 at 2:51 pm | Reply
      • Dex

        You mean... put a light to it... One of the few constitutions in the world that mentioned sending slaves back to their owners. The US are war criminals and torturers, don't harp on about being a beacon. If thats an example to follow I'm your uncle, monkey.

        June 25, 2011 at 12:06 pm |
  24. san01

    Fareed has zero concept of the Constitution. And he is, supposedly, from Harvard ?!

    June 24, 2011 at 3:56 pm | Reply
  25. peter

    The only amendment I would make is one to prevent gerrymandering. It is the only structural change I would make to our governing document. Gerrymandering, however, is eating at our government and society. it has lead to a House which is largely full of safe seats. The only challenge to most representatives comes from within their own party- further polarizing Congress. Not only does it exacerbates our political differences, it also cheapens our vote. Face it with a Congressman safely ensconced in a safe seat and most states predetermined in the electoral college, there is not much reason to vote. Districts should be drawn neutrally and not to make safe seats for incumbents. We can not count on our in incumbent politicians to make this change against their interest unless being forced by the Constitution..

    June 24, 2011 at 4:02 pm | Reply
  26. Ettore Timi

    I think that the US Constitution should be amended allowing also non nantural born citizens to run for presidency. The US is the only western big democracy in which there is still such a rule and in which all the citizens, and taxpayers, are not equals.

    June 24, 2011 at 6:46 pm | Reply
  27. Ettore Timi

    I think that the US Constitution should be amended allowing also non natural born citizens to run for presidency. The US is the only western big democracy in which there is still such a rule and in which all the citizens, and taxpayers, are not equals.

    June 24, 2011 at 6:46 pm | Reply
    • Dex

      They won't do anything about it. Of 6 amendments that have not been ratified, nearly all of them have to do with abolotion of slavery, rights of children and even the equality of sexes. Most are 100+ years old and still not done. How many hundred years are you prepared to wait for the racist Americans to recognise they live in a complete world.

      June 25, 2011 at 12:19 pm | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.