2022.0801.0001...

In a letter written to James Madison from Paris just after the French Revolution had broken out, Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) argues that any Constitution expires after 19 years and must be renewed if it is not to become “an act of force and not of right”:

The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water… (But) be­tween society and society, or generation and generation there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature. We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another… On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a per­petual constitution, or even a per­petual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, natu­rally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.

The year the U.S. Constitution was ratified was also the year the French Revo­lution broke out and Thomas Jefferson was there to witness it. In this letter to James Madison, Jefferson asks whether or not “one generation of men has a right to bind another,” either in the form of a financial debt or a political obli­gation to obey a constitution of laws not contracted by that individual. He comes to the surprising conclusion that any constitution (the American included) has to lapse roughly after every generation (actually, based on his calculations, every 19 years) since it was first signed and ratified. Thus, the American Constitution should lapse and become null and void in 1808. Jefferson believed in the princi­ple that “the earth belongs to the living and not to the dead” which meant that previous generations could not bind the current gener­ation to pay their debts, or require them to work in their father’s occupation, or to accept the laws and constitution drawn up by their ancestors. In his mind, “no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law”. The only “umpire” between the generations was the law of nature.”

- SOURCE -

Why the hell hasn't this been done??

OMFG! I need to be careful what I wish for. Infidel753 just informed me that repugliCON legislators (and their big money donors) are working on just that. It's absolutely terri­fying. Click on link...

Some Republicans Want a New Constitution

What might such a new Constitution do? Here's a small sample of the exciting possibilities:

• Declare that personhood begins at conception and killing a fetus is murder punishable by death
• Ban any federal or state laws that in any way limit gun ownership
• Declare that marriage is only between one biological male and one biological female
• Repeal the 14th Amendment (with its equal rights provision)
• Require that the federal budget is balanced every year
• State that the federal government may not tax people's incomes
• State that the federal government may not play any role in determining what is taught in schools
• Allow the president to declare an emergency, send Congress home, and rule by decree
• Declare that Christianity is the national religion
• Declare that English is the official language and all government proceedings must be only in English
• State that "forced savings" programs, like Social Security, are unconstitutional
• Provide that only persons born on U.S. soil of two citizen parents are U.S. citizens (and retroactively)
• Cap the number of states at 50 and declare that new states cannot be created or admitted
• State that all limits on campaign funding are unconstitutional
• Declare that all currently ratified treaties are null and void and have to be re-approved by the Senate
• Repeal the 17th Amendment and have state legislatures once again pick the senators
• Allow any state to nullify any federal law the state legislature disapproves of
• Give each state one vote in the House of Representatives, no matter how big its delegation is
• Based on the above, give each state three electoral votes
• Limit the power of the federal government to very few things
• Make the amendment process more difficult (e.g., four-fifths of the states need to ratify)
• Abolish the civil service and give the president power to fire any civil servant
• Establish term limits for all federal and state offices and also for civil servants

And much more. The sky is the limit. The core idea would be to reduce the federal government to something more like the Swiss federal government, with the states holding all the real power. It would be conservative nirvana, without all the fuss of passing two dozen amendments.

How realistic is this? Well, interested state legislators met yesterday as the Academy of States 3.0 in Denver to plan the convention. Would the states go along with this? Quite a few have already done so. Here is a map of them.

There are a few more links in the article.