Posted by
CKHustler on Wednesday, April 15, 2009 1:17:34 AM
"We, the people of the United States,
in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure
domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and
our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
States of America."
Article 1
Basically a summary of the legislative powers.
"and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on any question
shall, at the desire of one-fifth of those present, be entered on the
journal."
I found this to be an interesting statement. What if a party somehow took hold of 81 senators or 80% of the House? They could vote on anything they choose and withhold the votes from the public. At that point it would be clear which party was doing the damage, so it might not matter much, but this is an interesting law. I wonder how often they do withhold their votes from us.
"No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was
elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the
United States, which shall have increased during such time; and no
person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of
either House during his continuance in office."
I remember, I wondered about a person holding a state office while holding a federal office. It seems by this wording, because the state offices are not under the authority of the United States, it is lawful for a person to hold two such offices. Not that I would personally want that, but it is possible.
"If any bill shall not be returned by the president within ten days
(Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same
shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the
Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it
shall not be a law."
I was under the impression that liberals were constantly complaining about Bush doing something of this sort. What did they call it....I forget, started with an 's' I think. It seems he simply cannot pocket the bill, since it would therefore go into effect.
"To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts
and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United
States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout
the United States:"
I am going to try and find some reasonings that Congress cannot tax a certain individual at a higher rate than others. Im talking about the AIG bonuses here, not progressive tax rates. This doesn't seem to cover it completely.
"No capitation, or other direct tax shall be laid unless in proportion
to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."
Is this it? It says proportion, but it seems to put this direct tax as a tax to the States. But, alas...
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from
whatever sources derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
It would have nothing to do with a certain person...this is not it.
"or law impairing the obligation of contracts"
This would force the AIG bonuses to go through essentially. They were contracts and the government cannot intervene here. Im not all for these bonuses, but once congress gave the money and put the wording for them, nothing they can do about it. Don't give them money in the first place!
Ok, so the rest will be done tomorrow night. I haven't actually read through the entire Constitution before. I have read much of it at different times through researching issues, but never all the way through. It is incredibly easy to understand after reading the Federalist Papers lol.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke