" Once approved by Congress, the joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment does not require presidential approval before it goes out to the states. While Article I Section 7 provides that all federal legislation must, before becoming Law, be presented to the president for his or her signature or veto, Article V provides no such requirement for constitutional amendments approved by Congress or by a federal convention. Thus, the president has no official function in the process.[b] In Hollingsworth v. Virginia (1798), the Supreme Court affirmed that it is not necessary to place constitutional amendments before the president for approval or veto.[10]"

If Democrats win control of the House and Senate what amendments would most likely be ratified by 38 states? We could have an amendment to increase the federal minimum wage and tie it to the cost of living or quality healthcare as a basic human right or ban political free speech protections for non-human legal entities or ban broad immunity for the president and allow the pardon power of the president to be blocked by The Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader.

What hypothetical amendments would have the most support?

  • Abundance114@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s hilarious that even with all of that going on, there’s still not a single issue that the two parties can agree on and implement.

    Term limits? Profiting from your position/insider trading?

    Both popular issues with both parties, but absolutely zero attempt from either side to implement them.

      • Abundance114@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Oof, so you think that greater than 70% of the people in congress care more about their take home pay than the success of the country they represent?

          • Abundance114@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            22 hours ago

            The money isn’t that great, that by itself doesn’t explain anything; your chances of being the next Nancy Polosy is about 0%.

              • Abundance114@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 hours ago

                The obviously implication is that I meant “that, working in congress”… I didn’t mean exactly you in your current life situation.

        • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oof, so you think that greater than 70% of the people in congress care more about their take home pay than the success of the country they represent?

          Yes. Easily greater than 70%.

          • Abundance114@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            I’d like to think that if I was in their situation that I wouldn’t be in that 70%.

            If I was in a situation where I could screw everyone behind me, but make the county better in the process I’d do it in a heartbeat.

            • Undvik@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              23 hours ago

              That’s why you won’t get to their situation. You self-select out of it