Time for a new Constitution

[CMRivdogs]

16 minutes ago, pfife said:

The Federalist Papers really are super interesting.

But they weren't ratified by anything other than a newspaper editor

The Federalist Papers were basically 1780 something blogs written in support of the proposed constitution. 

[chasfh]

If the states continue to ossify politically, basically split right down the middle between red states and blue states, I don’t see how we could ever got another constitutional amendment passed. 

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, 1776 said:

I’m interested in hearing your take on this. There have been numerous amendments to our constitution so I don’t know to what degree it is “in stone forever.” I’m sure there will be more amendments going forward.

I’m a Thomas Jefferson fan and find his life interesting. In his own words, which I’m paraphrasing here, is that for the American citizenry to remain free they must remain educated. He personally oversaw the founding of UVA. He personally traveled abroad to seek out and bring educators to the new university. He wanted to have a first class learning experience (university) in Virginia. In other words, TJ walked the walk.

The AJ Mapp two book volume on his life is a great read.

TBH, I'm basically agnostic about it. As I've written I don't think there is any chance of even another amendment passing in the next 15 years or so. None of the latest proposals I've seen have any real traction.

I spent my formative years in Virginia, so Jefferson is close to my political and philosophical thoughts a lot. I believe he was a good philosopher, showed a varied interest in new and marvel ideas especially considering his inventions and attempts to bring new agricultural products to Virginia.

His religious freedom statute was probably his greatest document, and is ignored by many so called christians today. (I call myself a back pew Presbyterian). My wife was one of the first coed undergraduates at UVa and we've spent a bit of time there.

I don't believe he or any other politician of the 17th century should be judged solely on 20 or 21st century believes. He was a man of the times, not a deity. He inherited Sally Hemings from his late wife (they were half sisters, and basically a surrogate to her daughters after she died). Who knows what arrangements Jefferson and Hemings made other that his agreeing to free their offspring. The fact that Virginia law did not recognize freed slaves may have played into the picture since he did free on of Hemings brothers while living at Monticello. (The man bought his freedom) 

[CMRivdogs]

I'll place this here because it somewhat relates to the OP, and to the Electorial College. A letter from George Madison to George Hay on flaws in the constitution, in particular to electing an executive 

https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a2_1_2-3s10.html

Quote

Having thus made the remarks to which your communication led, with a frankness which I am sure you will not disapprove, whatever errors you may find in them, I will sketch for your consideration a substitute which has occurred to myself for the faulty part of the Constitution in question

"The Electors to be chosen in districts, not more than two in any one district, and the arrangement of the districts not to be alterable within the period of ------ previous to the election of President. Each Elector to give two votes, one naming his first choice, the other his next choice. If there be a majority of all the votes on the first list for the same person, he of course to be President; if not, and there be a majority, (which may well happen) on the other list for the same person, he then to be the final choice; if there be no such majority on either list, then a choice to be made by joint ballot of the two Houses of Congress, from the two names having the greatest number of votes on the two lists taken together." Such a process would avoid the inconvenience of a second resort to the Electors; and furnish a double chance of avoiding an eventual resort to Congress. The same process might be observed in electing the Vice President.

Your letter found me under some engagements which have retarded a compliance with its request, and may have also rendered my view of the subject presented in it more superficial than I have been aware. This consideration alone would justify my wish not to be brought into the public discussion. But there is another in the propensity of the Moment, to view everything, however abstract from the Presidential election in prospect, thro' a medium connecting it with that question; a propensity the less to be excused as no previous change of the Constitution can be contemplated, and the more to be regretted, as opinions and commitments formed under its influence, may become settled obstacles at a practicable season.

 

[Tiger337]

They could at least re-write it in 21st Century English.