-3 votes

DP! Let's do this! Amend the Constitution! Simple Plan!

Most of us know about Mark Levin's new book "The Liberty Amendments" and have been talking about it. Some of us are still very skeptical of an Article V convention to propose amendments to the constitution.

Still, many of us see how this is one of many tools we could actually use. Some of these amendments could actually give liberty just a bit more traction in electoral politics.

Electoral politics? You know, that thing that so many people registered as Republican for to try and vote for Dr. Paul. It's a lost cause, I think, but this is one way to reverse it.

We don't have to abandon our other efforts like the 10th amendment and so forth.

I really believe that with the attention to the concept from Levin's book, state politicians will pay attention and be ready to act if we push them.

Here's the plan:

1)Make a website - it will be a forum like Daily Paul, and function almost the same way. Call it LibertyAmendmentForum.com or something.

2)The website will be split into proposed amendments. We can propose anything. If your amendment is popular, it will get upvoted and noticed more. If your amendment is similar to another, it can get tagged under a more popular amendment. It doesn't have to be regular folks like us proposing amendments, we can post language from Levin's book, libertyamendment.com, or even that one professor... Randy Barnett?? from Georgetown who proposed a few amendments a few years ago.

3)The website technological set up, and community participation, will produce final language for any number of amendments. The community tags amendments to relate them to similar amendments, the community up votes their favorite language. The community upvotes their favorite arguments for certain amendments or language. The tech side of it will work by associating community generated posts into buckets having to do with topics, like 'balanced budget', or 'term limits'. Everything else is done by up votes. To Review:
*Community tags posts to put them into buckets.
*Up votes and views make popular posts more visible
*Each 'bucket' is split into the larger pool of general posts and discussion, and a special, smaller, category for language. So, in each topic you can debate the amendment idea in question, or, you can debate specific language. Again, this split is accomplished by community tag.
*Language 'votes' can be changed. General topics will be more visible based on total popularity. Language topics will be dynamic so that when you change your vote, language topics rise and fall.

4)After a few really popular amendments emerge, with clear 'winners' in terms of most popular language, then a final, third category of topic in each bucket will be used. This will be organized by state, and have to do with efforts to push that amendment.

5)The final step is easiest. Write a letter to your state legislators and include the amendments you want passed. Using the forum, these legislators might receive hundreds or thousands of identically worded amendments from the community. Email AJ, Ron Paul, Drudge, local media - skip national news. Get them involved. Organize 'friendly' rallies on tax day.

The reason this will work is because of organization. Sure, a con con can propose any old amendments - how the heck can we get 3/4 of the states to adopt them? Well, if an amendment or two at a time we write letters, rally, are nationally organized through the forum, and the wording is identical, this can actually work!!!

I'm not a web guru, but I will participate in these forums, I will write letters and emails to media. I will write letters, by hand, to my representatives in the state.


Again, to review the structure of it:
1) Posts generated by the community.
2) Posts tagged by creator and community into 'buckets'.
3) Buckets split into three categories: general, language, activism.
4) General topic is just a discussion on that theme, like 'balanced budget'. Topics visible by popularity, views, newness (like DP).
5) Language topics based on vote by user which change over time (you get one vote, and can change it), and also newness.
6) Activism is organized by state, but also has a 'national' category. Popularity works normally.
7) We write state legislators, local and alternative medias, and engage in outreach and activism.
8) We need not achieve one big convention. We can do it amendment by amendment, ultimately.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How about picking one key example

to rally around? What would be one such amendment that could get the most agreement and enthusiasm, and that could be expressed and explained clearly, that has a clear implementation path, etc? Show how it could work with one clear and popular example and you've got a springboard for doing more.

This is a potentially very interesting thing to do, but instead of just talking about how to do it, how about taking some concrete steps on a small scale?

This should remove some of your doubts Tman.


The subtypes: “radicals, idealists, realists and opportunists.”

Radical activists “want to change the system; have underlying socio/political motives’ and see multinational corporations as ‘inherently evil,’” explained Duchin. “These organizations do not trust the … federal, state and local governments to protect them and to safeguard the environment. They believe, rather, that individuals and local groups should have direct power over industry … I would categorize their principal aims … as social justice and political empowerment.”

The “idealist” is easier to deal with, according to Duchin’s analysis.

“Idealists…want a perfect world…Because of their intrinsic altruism, however, … [they] have a vulnerable point,” he told the audience. “If they can be shown that their position is in opposition to an industry … and cannot be ethically justified, they [will] change their position.”

The two easiest subtypes to join the corporate side of the fight are the “realists” and the “opportunists.” By definition, an “opportunist” takes the opportunity to side with the powerful for career gain, Duchin explained, and has skin in the game for “visibility, power [and] followers.”

The realist, by contrast, is more complex but the most important piece of the puzzle, says Duchin.

“[Realists are able to] live with trade-offs; willing to work within the system; not interested in radical change; pragmatic. The realists should always receive the highest priority in any strategy dealing with a public policy issue.”

Duchin outlined a corresponding three-step strategy to “deal with” these four activist subtypes. First, isolate the radicals. Second, “cultivate” the idealists and “educate” them into becoming realists. And finally, co-opt the realists into agreeing with industry.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Then why not start right here?

Post some proposed amendments with a distinctive prefix, maybe CSCC for "Crowd Sourced Con Con" or Liberty Amendment Forum or whatever.

Someone might post, for example, "CSCC proposal: RKBA" and then the text of the proposed replacement for the 2nd amendment.

Discussion and voting would make it clear which amendments had the most support. Periodically someone could collect the leading amendments into a summary article.

Having some well-worded amendments that have widespread support would provide a solid starting point and some momentum for getting a new website going. With enough momentum, maybe you could even get a kickstarter together to fund it or something. Just a thought.

I had a similar idea recently...

And I never knew about this Levin guys idea...

I like the idea of a 'Crowdsourced-Constitution'

I like that it could be moderated by motivated, intelligent people with no class or ulterior motives.

A People's Paper.

But who will honor it? Fuck that, why consider if your 'superiors' will honor it. Honor yourselves.

What if communists get in it? What a great opportunity to educate free market principles (ie. Austrian-style). Crowd sourcing will keep that down.

Whatabout trolls? They can keep trolling, they'll never gain steam.

Get it to go global!!! Don't restrict this governing document to a State, when we're advocating a stateless system ie. true austrian free market system.

I think this is the new activism.

If we all meet one day in the not so distant future and all sign our allegiance to this great document. Then NO God or Government will have any authority whatsoever over our selves. AND we will have the moral highground in the eyes of the people on this planet.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Levin is an opportunist...

Stuff he writes makes good toilet paper, kitty litter, etc. He attacked Ron Paul and his supporters with a viciousness reserved for mortal enemies during the 2008 election.

Learn to recognize fair weather friends, for Levin is one of them.

Restore the Foundations - "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"

AD Hominem!

Joseph Smith was an opportunist. His legacy has become a pretty darn good institution for millions of people since.

I could call his ideas ridiculous and destroy his moral character.

Sometimes, some people, who aren't like me, do things that are pretty awesome, or have ideas that can change the world, even though they aren't like me (or that idea of the perfect me in my head).

Dontchya think?

BTW, I have no idea who Mark Levin is.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Honestly, the politicians

Honestly, the politicians aren't following the rules they have now. I don't see how adding/changing the rules will make a damn difference. We need enforcement. Jail oath breakers as traitors and stop electing politicians who promise to be oath breakers before they even get in in the first place.

Andrew Napolitano for President 2016!

"Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping Graven images." - ironman77

Try to JAIL

The local drug dealer in your own neighborhood. See how that works. OR wait, you think someone else should do that for you? Someone in power/with power. YEs, great idea, we should demand (on blog posts) that the people we give up our power to start jailing those people who we give our power to.

That's great. Don't waste your breath, oops I mean your finger glucose...

Unless your just writing these as a diary, "Dear diary, please jail all the bad people. Then create some magic good people to occupy their posts and also keep them from becoming like those other people too, goodnite".

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.


So let's quit consenting to their lecherous rule!!!

But if we each do it alone, they will pick us off one by one. IF we build a group around an idea or better yet, a Principled Document. Then they will be exposed as the slave owning, masters they are when they come for us. We will have leverage, liberty and morality on our side.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Denise B's picture

Amending the Constitution

is a very bad idea for several reasons. First, it ultimately could result in a Constitutional Convention which, we the people would have no way of controlling, any more than we have any way of controlling what the the outlaw Congress does on a daily basis (i.e. Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc. etc.). No matter how much pressure we put on them, ultimately they do whatever they want and if we let them mess with the Constitution we are pretty much guaranteed to end up with something much worse than what we already have. Secondly, they already ignore the constraints of the Constitution, pretty much on a daily basis, so why should/would they pay attention to anything new that gets added, unless of course, we end up with something worse than what we started with, in which case, they will gladly use it as justification to trample our rights even more than they already do.

Even if we were to just propose an Amendment only, and did so without requiring a Constitutional Convention, it takes a super majority to pass an Amendment and given the current miscreants that we have in Congress right now, there is little to no chance of getting a majority of them to agree on anything which is going to benefit We the People, or restrict the miscreants power over us.

I think that until we can find a way to force these people to act within the constraints of the existing Constitution, any action of the sort you propose is a compete waste of time, and potentially very dangerous.

I think it would be great if they amended the constitution

to match their ACTUAL BEHAVIORS. Then we wouldn't be operating under the semblance of enlightened benevolence and legitimacy! ;-D

Kids in schools would begin to learn the actual ethos governing our government and be free from having to 'unlearn' their initial BULLSHIT indoctrination.

What's wrong with being more truthful and speeding up the process (of destruction).

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

If they already control everything

And ignore the constitution, then they are winning right now already.

How are a couple of reforms that would require 3/4 of the states to support going to hurt?

I'm honestly getting the impression, understanding the Article V convention, that these antithetical ideas are psyops to prevent the people from an actual meaningful reform process.

But, fine, let's not participate, let's not do a damn thing. Let's let them completely control this amendment process. Let's let them keep their status quo.

Great, good idea. Let's move to Chile, let the rooster crow thrice. Whatever...


There are a LOT of people on here, who have premade counterarguments in their brains that THEY CANNOT SHAKE, no matter how hard you try to get them to see your vision. Don't waste time on them. They'll come around as soon as someone they idolize comes up with a good argument for YOUR IDEA.

It's so easy to counter claims and pile doubt on future vision than it is to open your mind and allow new thoughts in. Don't expect those without vision to do elsewise.

I think maybe, contacting some of those smart Northern Europeans in the 'Pirate Party', with their computer savvy and Tor distribution expertise, might be a wise next step.

Of course, my vision is global, yours might be national only still...

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Denise B's picture

I am not trying to

discourage activism, and I don't think that moving to Chile (or anywhere else) is the answer to our problems; however, any Amendments to the Constitution are going to require a super majority and I simply do not believe you will ever get a majority of Congress (much less a 3/4 majority) to vote for an Amendment which will actually force them to relinquish any of their power. In theory your idea sound good; however, whenever any substantive reforms are put forth in Congress they are always ridiculed or ignored all together. The "Read the Bills" act, which was introduced by Rand Paul is one of many, many examples. All this bill required was that the members of Congress actually be forced to read the bills before they vote on them, and Rand couldn't get even a handful of people in the outlaw Congress to agree that this was a good idea. The simple fact is that the criminals in Congress are not going to vote for anything which will substantively diminish their control and give any power back to We the People.

That does not mean; however, that we should just give up. If you ask me, I think that these people should start being held personally accountable for violating their oaths of office. It is absurd that Martha Stewart went to jail for lying to a fed, yet these people swear an oath to uphold the Constitution and break that oath every single day and lie to their constituents every day and not one of them is ever held accountable. If we should be working on anything together as a nation, it should be how we can hold these people personally accountable for violating their oaths. I am working on writing a post with an idea that may very well be a way to start holding these criminals personally responsible for violating their oaths and I will share it soon....

I'm not begging a bunch of illegitmate fcuks for anything

I don't need no fcuking rulers.

This is the Attitude that will get results!

Stop trying to please the 'House Masters' or get them to change the conditions on the plantation by begging.

Even if you have the GREATEST PROPOSAL in the world, you're still fucked, because your giving SOME OTHER HUMAN BEING, the power to make decisions over your life.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

While I like the

idea, I have many concerns--which I admit may be unfounded since I have little computer savvy. What's to stop PAID propagandists from proposing UNConstitutional ideas, then get said ideas mass upvoted? Or HB Gary-type activity?? Would there be enough TRUE liberty-lovers to counteract this type of activity? And even if there were enough liberty-lovers, what's to prevent rigging the results?

I did not upvote nor downvote your idea...

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond

You don't have to participate if you don't like an amendment

The assumption is that people generally agree on an amendment, and the goal is to produce a final language.

Congress and the states can already pass whatever amendments they want. We're assuming that a very large percentage of the people, if presented with the idea, will support basic reforms like term limits.

The website is a means to organize a minority (us) to effectively raise the profile of specific amendments so the public through state legislatures will support them.

A few hundred folks in a state voting district can make a big difference because it's easier to get the ear of a state delegate.

I like the 'minority to effectively raise the profile...'

Make this documents theoretical model Austrian Free Markets. Then we're choosing language, contending possible outcomes, etc. in order to fully define, and re-fine our ability to create a structure that maximally brings about the truly free market system we KNOW WILL CREATE THE GREATEST human conditions the world has ever known.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

I'm astounded

Here's something we can actually do.

Why did we ever try voting for Ron Paul? Why did we even care?

This is doable. We vote in the GD White House 'petitions'. We talk about how 'america is doomed'. Yet, here is something we could actually easily do.

80% of the work would be online.


The people who have the time to respond with negativity HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE WORLD.

They are small people.

My contention is presenting it to inferior people (congressmen/women) to ratify.

Why not let each individual man & woman self-ratify this Principled Document.

Thus they remove their consent from the corrupt system, and freely choose to support something greater.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

And wow I was downvoted for this


Why Don't You And Mr. Levin,

Take your ideas to Israel, where they really need a Constitution .


Mark Levin?

Let's get a new Amendment

so it can be ignored liked the others.

Salvation will not come through government.

Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
A common sense take on politics and current events.


Constitution Shmonstitution


Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is quoted as saying, “Before the Freedom of Information Act, I used to say at meetings, ‘The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer’,” during a 1975 conversation which included a Turkish and Cypriot official.

They fight on every front

So should we. This is doable.

To clarify the tag concept

Buckets refers to proposed languages and concepts that would ultimately be advocated for as a single amendment.

Tags are just topics that posts can have in common.

A tag might be budget, but you could have a 'balanced budget amendment' bucket as well as a 'congress must pass a budget' amendment.

They could both be tagged budget to organize the topics and help with searching.

The buckets on the other hand exist to lead to one set of language for an amendment referring to specific thing - so we can advocate for it in unison!

Anyone who can or wants to do this

I will absolutely help consult, moderate, whatever.