John Orr’s rebuttal of my initial proposals for Constitutional changes stated I missed the mark because I didn’t include examples. Oh, the bane of a 250-word limit in Letters to the Editor! He also argued against clarifying responsibilities of the federal government and eliminating the Electoral College.
When Kim Davis, the Rowan County Clerk in Kentucky refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses after a Supreme Court ruling, Republican politicians flocked to Kentucky to declare she didn’t have to comply with federal law because of her First Amendment rights. Ted Cruz made this an explicit policy plank in his campaign repeating in interviews and campaign rallies that religious beliefs come before federal or state laws. Since the Constitution expressly prohibits the government from establishing a specific religion, that campaign promise, if implemented, would allow anyone to defy any law using any undefined religious beliefs as their legal defense.
Orr suggested reading Article 1, Section 8 to support his position that federal government responsibilities don’t need clarification. While focusing on my random examples, did he happen to notice the part where the Congress has power over naval and land forces, but there’s no mention about the other elements of our national defense like air, space, and cyber?
Does Orr understand the Electoral College process ensures Illinois votes from outside of Cook County in a presidential election don’t matter? I think the winner of the most U.S. Congressional districts should be president. That would eliminate winner-take-all and make all votes count.
David Vail, O'Fallon