Quote:
Who gets to decide what is a "big important" issue?
|
Anybody who can get enough votes to satisfy the requirements of the Amendment process. The point is that the process itself is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. The idea is to make it such a pain in the ass to change the Constitution that, for an issue to even -reach- that level, it's big and important by default.
Of course, Statists/Collectivists of both stripes long ago gave up on following the rules of the document/contract they swore to uphold and defend. They find it much easier to simply ignore the Constitution's strictures. After all, the only way to get a law, statute, punishment or ordinance definitively thrown out as unconstitutional is to get it alllllll the way up to the Supreme Court, which process is difficult, time-consuming, expensive, and
rigged. By -that- time, the law has had its' intended effect, and the SCOTUS is notoriously unwilling to strike down Federal laws, programmes, etc. Sometimes they're a little less accommodating to State Gov'ts and cities, but only sometimes and only just.