The Republican bill of rights.

• Author: Feldman, Michael
• Position: Satire on Constitutional reform - Column

Chair: As you know, we're already well into the second hundred days, and we've set aside the second week of April to reconsider the Constitution. The sixteenth is Easter, so I figure the seventeenth through the nineteenth should be ample for the Bill of Rights; it's only ten amendments. The Democrats thrashing about nearly pulled us under when they introduced the Fourth Amendment on the floor and we were compelled to vote it down, but, although that was premature, I don't believe any damage was done. In fact, only MacNeil/Lehrer picked it up, and they were afraid--in the present climate--to make a big deal about it. Sure would hate to see those two boys separated.

Anyway, looking at the whole package, I say we keep the title "Bill of Rights," especially as we're adding "and Responsibilities," although we will refer to it collectively as the Armey/Hatch Act, and we naturally hope the legislative title will catch on with the media. Kind of like adding our signatures to the Constitution.

Now, to get down to brass tacks, Amendment One, religion--window dressing, really, you can't really come out against it, although the language we're adding, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof in school" should make a difference. The nice thing about it is it's unobtrusive. "Not abridging the freedom of responsible speech," I like, and I think we need to insert something before "press" as well, but I don't think we should use "responsible" again. "Legitimate," maybe, or "mainstream." We've already got "peaceably" in the right to assemble, so that's nicely qualified. Overall, religion needs to be in there, but I don't like to lead with it--too controversial. You know what they say, one of the two things you don't talk about.

The second. Guns. See, that should be first. People assume these things are prioritized. It might be helpful to say "rifles and guns" or specify barrels and bores, automatic, semi-automatic, magazine sizes, etc. I'll mention it at the NRA Donor. If there's some way of writing it so it's not ambiguous, you know, the militia part--you clearly don't have to join a militia to "keep and bear Arms"--that needs to be cleaned up, but I love the capitalization.

Three--no soldiers shall be quartered in a house? Is this a problem? Can't this be addressed through zoning? I don't see what this is doing in here. With base closings, I could see it being a question, but it's a waste...