|
Constitutional Ammendment Observations
Just trying to make folks do some deep thinking |
The Love of My Life!
| Constitutional Ammendment Observations |
| 06.28.04 (2:34 pm) [edit] |
|
It is my practice from time to time to read the Constitution of the United States and its subsequent Amendments. For the past few weeks I’ve been in one of those constitutional review moods; this activity is relevant to a short story I’m writing, but this is a reoccurring event for me at the rate of about three times a year anyway. It is too bad our legislators do not make the process of change more easily understood. Certain articles and sections of the original Constitution have been amended numerous times, which of course means the amendments themselves have been amended. It all gets a bit confusing in my way of thinking, but then it seems this is the intentional process lawyers do things! Perhaps this is their way of ensuring their own job security by sustaining their ability to baffle the average citizen with BS. A nice way to make the changes would employ a system such as is used within the intelligence community; in their system the old stuff is never taken out, it is simply struck through and the appropriate changes are inserted into the appropriate area to reflect the current paradigm. This method sure clears up a lot of confusion, because its leaves a historical record of change on a specific concepts. To me an interesting aspect of my constitutional review is to observe how some of the states react(ed) to the proposals. Perhaps you will find some of my examples ironic or interesting in your own right. Article XIII This article repeals slavery. It was proposed in January of 1865 and ratified by December of that same year. Two states rejected this amendment only to ratify it a few years latter, notably New Jersey and Delaware. Now Florida liked this article so much it ratified it twice (Ok, the real reason is the state rewrote its own constitution so Florida felt the new government should ratify the amendment). There were some late comers to accept this amendment after they had already rejected this amendment though, Delaware held out until 1901 and Kentucky didn’t ratify it until 1976. The winner here is Mississippi that rejected this amendment in 1865 and still has not ratified it to this day. Article XV This article fixed some apparent oversights in Article XIII. It seems abolishing slavery was one thing, but being allowed representation was another thing in the view of many states, so Article XV sets things right by assuring that people of all race, color or previous status as a slave or indentured servitude have the right to vote and thus be represented. This article was first proposed February 1869 and it became law in March of 1870. There is a bit of conflict in this date though, because New York subsequently changed their mind and withdrew their ratification consent in January of 1870, only to change their position again in 1970. New York’s first change of position in this article didn’t change anything because by 1870 several other states came online to make this the law of the land and by the time the courts were ready to tackle this issue the whole majority thing was a moot point. There were also some late comers to ratify this article as well; Oregon was 1959, California 1962 and Kentucky 1976. The notable standout here is Tennessee which as never ratified this article. Enough civics for one day, perhaps there will be more to follow tomorrow. |
This free script provided by
JavaScript
Kit
Look Around You
