TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Should the US convene a new Constitutional Convention to hammer out the US Constitution, Version 2? How could we make it better?

The US Constitution is an amazing piece of work, but let's face it there are some ambiguities, outdated concepts, and missing (perhaps) parts. the Supreme Court and Congress daily interpret and abide but seldom actually change or update the original codicil. The current issues of privacy with the NSA spying and out of control gun violence, proselytizing in the military and a host of other news stories of late suggest it may be time for an overhaul of the original Constitution.
Is it time to convene a second Constitutional convention to clarify, edit and update or would the task prove impossible? Perhaps the task is too risky or simply beyond our reach. Maybe the original is as good as it gets.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Dec 20 2013: Now that we have tried every Fing thing else, hows about we try what the framers intended?
    • Dec 20 2013: I think the framers knew they had written an imperfect document but they had the foresight to build in a mechanism to make it a living document that can be owned by each successive generation.
      • thumb
        Dec 20 2013: But it is vogue for them to use czars and signing agreements and focus on swing states and threaten congressional members with cutting off campaign funds if they don't vote the way that the party leaders want to by pass the intended mechanisms for change.

        The better method would be to use the power of the Republic and the states rights to vote for change through article 5 or if it gets bad enough secession.

        But at the end of the day people are complacent because of ignorance to the real danger which is the bigger difficulty.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.