Do we need to call for a Constitutional Convention for proposing Amendments per the requirements of Article V of the United States Constitution? Can we get 2/3 of the state legislatures to introduce and pass binding resolution, by veto proof majorities? Can we get 3/4 of the state legislatures to introduce and pass the proposed amendment by veto proof majorities?
To carry on with the tongue and cheek comment by Warren Buffet concerning how to solve the deficit mess. Instead of hanging the Sword of Damocles over the heads of the citizens about the current deficit situation, and threating to blow all us of out of the water. Why not put the Sword over the heads or our elected legislative members. Putting their jobs on the line if and when they as a body cannot do the job.
Do we the people want or need mechanism to help up make the hard choices? Forbid that "We the people" actual take some initiative and responsibility for this current mess. If the answer is that we require such a mechanism to save us from our selves. The following might be such a mechanism.
A proposed amendment to the United State Constitution could read something like this:
Here by let it be resolved and agreed that all sitting members of the Congress of United States, either duly elected or duly appointed would not be eligible to stand for re-election to for any seat in any of the legislative bodies as defined in the United States Constitution in the subsequent congressional election cycle if the United States Treasury annual computed Current Accounts has a deficit greater than 3 percent of the United States Department of Commerce computed Current Annual Gross Domestic Product during the current congressional term they are serving. Additionally setting members of the current United States Congress in which the Current Accounts exceed the Current Annual Gross Domestic Product shall be ineligible to be appointed to any open seat in either of the legislative bodies for the current term of those bodies, and the subsequent natural term of those bodies. The terms of this amendment may be suspended for the remainder of the current Congressional session by two-thirds supermajority vote in both houses of the Congress of the United States of that Congressional session.
So why do we need something like this? Let us look at some statistics concern the current United States Congress and the two previous incarnations of that body.
In the 109th Congress the average age of the members was 56.0 years. The average age of a Representative was 55 years. The average age of a Senator was 60.0 years. The dominant professions of the members are Law, Public Service/Politics, and Business. The Average length of service for a Representative was 4.3 terms, or 9.3 years. The average length of service for a Senator was 2.01 terms or 12.1 years.
In the 110th Congress the average age of the members was 57.0 years. The average age of a Representative was 55.9 years. The average age of a Senator was 61.7 years. The dominant professions of the members are Public Service/Politics, Business, and Law. The Average length of service for a Representative was 5.1 terms, 10.2 years. The average length of service for a Senator was 2.1 terms or 12.8 years.
In the 111th Congress the average age of the members was 58.2 years. The average age of a Representative was 57.2 years. The average age of a Senator was 63.1 years. The dominant professions of the members are Public Service/Politics, Business, and Law. The Average length of service for a Representative was 5.15 terms, 10.3 years. The average length of service for a Senator was 2.2 terms or 13.4 years.
All of the above data is from the Congress Research Service, Library of Congress reports for 109th, 110th, and 111th Membership Profile reports.
I hear about all of the new/young blood coming into the Congress from the various news services and yet the data indicates that it is a bunch of crud. The average Representatives average length of service since the 109th Congress has increased by 19.7 percent. The average Senator length of service since the 109th Congress has increase by 10.8 percent. The house members have had to stand for two election cycles since the 109th Congress. That was two chances to change the makeup of United States House of Representatives. A third of the Senate has had a chance to stand for one election cycle. For one group it was two chances, for the second group it was one chance to put the fear of God into someone.
So as one can see “We the People” have been throwing the bums out (NOT). Yes we the citizen of this republic have been doing our job (NOT). Meanwhile the leadership of this country and the citizens are just pissing time away, and digging the pit deeper.
I am not sure that our founding fathers really wanted the country that they founded run by individuals who identify their occupation as Public Service/Politics. The signers of the Declaration of Independence were Lawyers (25), Merchants (15), Farmer/Plantation Owners (9), Physicians (4), Scientist (1), and Minister (1). As best as I can tell none of them really identified their occupation as “Public Service/Politics”. Many if not all of them practice Public Service and Politics, but they were not so bold as to declare it as an occupation, with all of the attendant baggage that an occupation has.
Why the hell are the Tea Party members not pushing an agenda like this? Here is their chance to make a lasting mark in the history of the United States, as opposed to being an over looked footnote.