What would you like to see as the outcome of a constitutional convention in the US charged with rewriting the country's constitution?

I would like the Electoral College system eliminated, and I would like the Second Amendment clarified.

I would like the Second Amendment repealed completely.

State Powers stolen by the Fed returned to the States where it belongs.

Provisions of the Bill of Rights incorporated in the Constitution, not as amendments which can be repealed
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 incorporated, with the addition of sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability as protected classes.

I would love to see real election reform. Abolish the electoral college, shorter election cycle and primaries all on the same day.

Second Amendment repealed.

Are you kidding? How could the people WE elect rewrite the most important document in the history of our country when they can’t even agree on how to stop madmen from shooting down school children or who has the right to go to the bathroom !!!

@Call_Me_Jay Any part of the Constitution can be amended or repealed at any time, doesn’t matter if they are in amendments or elsewhere.

@zenvelo Yes, good point, new amendments can supersede the articles. It’s not repeal, but same result.

I’m with most on the campaign finance reform. Strong verbage regarding corporate personhood and monopoly regulation is someting I think we need. I would also like to see property rights restored and I’m with @Cruiser on states rights. The 2nd amendment should have additional protections for gun owners. It’s already crystal clear though.

I think if anything like this happens it won’t be to our benefit.

@zenvelo, @Call_Me_Jay,Any part of the Constitution can be amended or repealed at any time, doesn’t matter if they are in amendments or elsewhere.

A couple of examples would be the 18th Amendment added something to the Constitution that wasn’t there originally, and the 21st Amendment which repealed the 18th.

Corporations are NOT people and money is NOT free speech in elections and related to government activities.

@dabbler SCOTUS disagrees with you on that point.

@Rarebear I side with @dabbler in that I too would like to see an amendment to the 14th Amendment that would create restrictions on corporate “personhood” to limit unfettered campaign contributions. We have limits of what an individual can donate so why not extend that to corporations or at least put a sane and reasonable limit to any one corporate/PAC entity? This IMO would be a most worthy outcome at the constitutional convention.

@Cruiser I agree also. But Dabbler made a statement that SCOTUS clearly disagrees with. So money is free speech until the law is overturned.

@Rarebear With bearing the risk of assuming what @dabbler‘s answer was….if you consider that answer in direct response to the question as asked it makes sense in that they wish or hope the Constitutional convention or the SCOTUS would remedy this egregious campaign funding misstep…at least to me it does.

@Cruiser Given the OP premise, in a Con-con, I would hope to see that and similar issues (e.g., campaign finance, election process, voting rights, etc.) addressed as part of the debate leading up to the series of amendments needed to update the current Constitution.

@Rarebear

@dabbler was not saying corporations are not people in legal terms today.

@dabbler was saying the idea that “corporations are people” should be squashed.

@dabbler was saying the constitution should be changed to clearly say, “Corporations are NOT people and money is NOT free speech in elections and related to government activities.”

The SCOTUS certainly does NOT agree with what I wrote.
That’s exactly why I believe we need to include the clarification I mentioned in an updated constitution.