Is It Time For a New Bill of Rights?

It’s been quite a long time since the United States Constitution had a new amendment passed. The last amendment to be ratified was the 27th Amendment, which passed in 1993, but was first proposed all the way back in 1789. Evidently, Congress seems unable to pass new amendments nowadays, but this isn’t the first time that decades have gone by without any amendments. The ratification process is exceedingly difficult, as it requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress to be proposed, and a vote of three-fourths of the state legislatures or conventions to be ratified. In an increasingly polarized country, it is seemingly impossible for any alteration to the Constitution to not enter a state of political gridlock. It is hard enough for two-thirds of Congress to agree on something, let alone expecting nearly every state to support a proposal.

This begs the question: is it time for new amendments to the Constitution? Some may argue it is unnecessary, as court reinterpretations of the Constitution have served the same function of amendments in changing the law of the land. For instance, gay marriage was legalized not through an amendment, but through a decision by the Supreme Court in 2015. However, courts can always go back on their decisions with new interpretations. With far-right Republicans trying to pass anti-transgender laws all around the country, it has become clear that Americans cannot leave their rights in the hands of judges who may have political agendas.

The rights of Americans need to be enshrined in the founding document, the one thing courts can never strike down, to be truly secure. Since the country is so far behind on amendments that reflect the issues of the modern age, it is fitting that a second Bill of Rights be ratified to solve many of these issues Americans face. This would hopefully be just the start of an era where passing amendments becomes a much more common occurrence. There will be ten amendments proposed for this new Bill of Rights, just like the original Bill of Rights.

Twenty-eighth Amendment

The first amendment proposed will be one that makes it easier to pass amendments in the first place. It would make it so a two-thirds majority in only one house of Congress or a simple majority in both houses is required for an amendment to be proposed, rather than two-thirds majorities in both houses. The three-fourths majority of states will also be reduced to a two-thirds majority needed for amendments to be ratified. This would make it so it isn't ridiculously hard for amendments to be passed. However, it still preserves federalism by not going overboard and allowing nearly half of the states to have an amendment they rejected imposed on them by the federal government. This wouldn’t make it easy to pass amendments, it would just make it feasible which it frankly isn’t under the current requirements. Truthfully, it would make more sense to pass this separately and prior to the rest of the amendments so they have a better chance of passing.

Twenty-ninth Amendment

The next amendment is a LGBTQ civil rights bill guaranteeing equal rights before the law for all American citizens regardless of sexual orientation or gender expression. This would take away the power of state governments to take away medical access for adults who undergo transition surgery; guarantee that all marriages are given the same rights regardless of the genders of the partners; protect free speech of transgender performers; and prohibit discriminatory service on the basis of religious freedom in cases where the only difference between customer and server is a matter of identity. Although much of these rights have already become reality through the enforcement of court decisions and the widespread LGBTQ acceptance in the US that has arisen in the past decade, there remains a concerted effort by certain conservative politicians who have tried to turn the clock back on these rights. 

Thirtieth Amendment

This amendment will make it the right of all women to have abortions, except for late-term abortions- in which case it will only be allowed for the various exceptions they are already allowed for like when the mother’s life is at risk, or in cases of rape, incest, or medical complications that make the baby incompatible with life. The truth is, late-term abortions without one of those exceptions don’t happen anyway for the obvious reason that by that point, the child is actually a baby with consciousness and no longer a cluster of cells. This doesn’t stop many Republicans from make-believing that they do happen, thus including this provision is a compromise measure to ease their concerns and make it more likely for the bill to pass. This is the best example of why relying on courts is inadequate. For decades, Roe V. Wade protected women’s rights to bodily autonomy but all it took was the Supreme Court being filled with far right extremists to take away millions of women’s rights to control their bodies and lives. This is yet another case of civil rights which need to be protected by the Constitution in a time when they are threatened.

Thirty-first Amendment

This amendment is a gun-control amendment which regulates aspects of the Second Amendment. It would raise the age for purchasing guns to 21 nationally; require extensive background checks on every gun sold in the country; ban assault weapons from being sold; require tests at least as hard as driving tests to receive guns; and nationally mandate red-flag laws. Gun violence is an epidemic that the US has been facing for so long that people have become desensitized to it, but it is one of the most horrific and pressing crises to solve. Guns are the leading cause of death for children, more than car accidents or any disease. Through both shootings and suicide, thousands have died, but conservatives block any attempt to regulate guns to prevent future deaths. As for the argument that it is unconstitutional to deny the right to bear arms: firstly, what about the other firearms which are already banned? And secondly, the Founders allowed the Constitution to be amended and this would be achieved through an amendment, making it constitutional. The rest of the provisions are needed to make it harder for somebody who intends to commit violence to get a gun without any qualifications. They would also make it easier for law enforcement to identify the people with guns who have a criminal past or show signs of committing violence, which would allow them to stop more deaths before they happen.

Thirty-second Amendment

This amendment would prohibit the government from drafting individuals. Men would no longer be required to sign up to Selective Service at 18 years old and could no longer be forced by the government to go to war. This is an amendment about liberty. The government has no right to force someone into an occupation they don’t want and ship them off to kill or be killed. Of course it’s been a long time since the US had a draft, the last time was Vietnam half a century ago. However, the fact that it’s still possible is terrible and could become a problem if there is ever another major war the US becomes entangled in. It is authoritarian to use the threat of material punishment enforced by the state if someone does not participate in what is most likely an unjust war where they might be killed. There could possibly be an exception for wars against nations committing genocide as drafts are probably necessary in cases like World War II where the Nazis and the Japanese Empire were massacring the entire world.

Thirty-third Amendment

This one is based on an amendment that has already been proposed in the past, the We the People Amendment. This amendment specifies that rights protected by the Constitution apply to natural citizens only and not corporations, limited liability companies, and private business entities. This does away with corporate personhood which was established by the Supreme Court decision Citizens United V. FEC. Other sections of the amendment subjects corporations to regulation by the people through the legislative process, prohibits corporate entities from making contributions in any election or ballot, gives Congress and the States the power to limit and regulate the spending of candidates, and authorizes committees to receive, spend, and publicly disclose the sources of all election contributions and expenditures. This serves to reduce corporate influence in politics which breeds corruption and perverts the agendas of those in public office to be more concerned with their cash flow than of reforming public policy for the betterment of the people. Something that could be added to the amendment is a prohibition of lobbying in politics. Lobbying is basically just a legal form of bribery which corrupts politicians and it is high time it was ended. Big money in politics has proven to be undemocratic as it buys out politicians and makes them unresponsive to their constituents.

Thirty-fourth Amendment

This amendment makes it so congressmen can only vote on a bill if they pass a comprehension test of the contents of the bill. The whole concept of democracy is at risk of being undermined when politicians vote with their party rather than for policy. It is nothing short of absurdity that Congress is expected to be less responsible than school students are. Just like a student needs to demonstrate responsible behavior by reading a text before analyzing it, the people who decide national policy should be expected to do the same. If a congressman has not even read a bill and has no idea what it would actually do, then they have nothing valuable to add to the conversation. They are not fulfilling their duty of representing their constituents if they vote arbitrarily.

The questions on these tests will be objective and easy to anyone who reads even a detailed summary of the bill. But to those too irresponsible to even bother doing their research, they will fail the test and not be allowed to influence the result with their uninformed opinions. There is the risk of these tests being politically weaponized so a committee of respected educators would create the tests and it would be outside the control of the government or either of the two parties. Attached to this amendment is also a provision that bars congressmen with conflicts of interest from voting on bills. If they have business relations with a corporation or business affected by a measure, they will not be allowed to vote on that bill either. The goal of this amendment is to get rid of the mindless partisanship and corruption in Congress that kills good bills and replace it with actual consideration of the pros and cons of proposed legislation.

Thirty-fifth Amendment

This amendment is a sort of companion to the previous one, but it is one which promotes responsibility for the Supreme Court instead of Congress. It gives Supreme Court justices term limits of twelve years and makes it so that instead of the president appointing justices, national popular elections would be held to fill in vacant slots in the court. This takes away the archaic lifelong tenures of Supreme Court justices that has often resulted in antiquated beliefs from judges appointed decades ago that don’t reflect modern society. Taking away the president’s influence would reduce the long-standing practice of partisan politicalization of the court.

Thirty-sixth Amendment

This amendment promotes democracy and limits gerrymandering. It would abolish the Electoral College so that elections can no longer be skewed in favor of a candidate who lost the popular vote but won the most states in the Electoral College. This would make the presidential election truly democratic for the first time. To accomplish the limiting of gerrymandering, the amendment would increase the members in the House of Representatives from 435 to 930, which is the number that would reduce the disparity of the population among the districts representatives serve and make each district roughly equal in population. Creating smaller districts would make it significantly harder to gerrymander them and it would bring competition to places which have long been politically dominated by other parts of their district. This is also a simple remedy for the fact that representatives serve an average number of 747,000 people, a number far too large to effectively represent. The number of representatives has not increased in over a century despite the population rapidly growing since then. Compare this to when the nation was founded and representatives represented an average of 30,000 people. Instead of redrawing the existing 435 districts which gives politicians opportunities for clever tricks that split up the opposing party’s voters into different districts, the number of districts should be increased so different regions’ needs get more properly met.

Thirty-seventh Amendment

The final amendment will guarantee universal healthcare to all Americans. The US is one of the only developed countries without universal healthcare which is a massive injustice in the country’s society. It should be the right of all Americans to have easy and affordable access to the tools they need to be healthy and live.