10-24-2011, 10:33 PM
rjmacs wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
I guess I wasn't quick enough to make this edit to my post above, "You said, "We don't change the Constitution simply because we've figured out a better way to do things. We change the Constitution to remedy serious flaws, to guarantee specific rights, occasionally to change the powers of government." So either what happened with the 12th Amendment was serious enough to warrant a change or your claim isn't true. If it was serious enough, then why aren't the issues I'm bringing up serious enough?"
Because they can be fixed with plain old non-Constitution-amending laws. Which is easier, faster, simpler, and just as effective.
Okay, I agree with that, but if there were no non-Constitutional way of changing the situation, you seem to think that it's not a big enough issue to bother going through the process of a Constitutional amendment. In that case, plug in our disagreement, rinse and repeat.
