I would like to eliminate the Presidential Electoral College vote. We live in an age where we can count each person's vote and the college "voters" do not have to vote the will of the people. I also think the Presidential and Vice Presidential election should be separate. We have had some lame veeps because no Prez candidate will bring on a mate that will be better than he/she.

There are a number of things that I would like to see enshrined in amendments.

First of all, I would like to see term limits for the members of Congress. Too many of them are making a career out of it and I think that spending that much time in Washington, they lose touch with what it is really like for the rest of us. I think that I would like to see both houses limited to three terms with the option to run again after sitting out for one full term.

Second, I would like the line item veto given to the President. This would make it a lot easier to strip the pork out a budget.

It seems to me that there were others, but I can't think of them right now.
-------
Addendum:

I just remember the other amendment that I would like to see. I would eliminate the winner take all system that most states have for their electors. Instead, I would prefer the electors awarded for the House districts be chosen according to how their districts vote. As it is, in a state like California, those who live in rural areas are pretty much disenfranchised by Los Angeles and the Bay Area because those two areas tend to dominate the elections. If you take a look at the maps from the last election ( http://www-personal.umich.edu/.../...predbluer1024.png http://www-personal.umich.edu/.../...predbluer1024.png ), you can see how much of the country was not really represented by the election results.

One of the main reasons for the electoral college was to insure that Presidential candidates could simply ignore the smaller states when campaigning. However, the winner take all system creates a different inequality. It makes it possible for Presidential candidates to simply focus on urban population center and ignore rural areas. By apportioning representation in the college according to how the Congressional districts vote it would prevent the urban areas from dominating a state's delegation.

The "Put your money where your mouth is" Amendment.

You want a war- you're the first on the front line.

You want your church to run things? They're liable to pay their fair share of taxes, and they're liable to fund any mistakes made.

Essentially- you wanna change things- you get to pay for it, personally.

I would like to see an amendment that decriminalized all vice-laws. Our prisons are filled with non-violent offenders that cost our country millions. These people need medical rehabilitation, not incarseration.

When a statute is declared/found unconstitutional, the Legislators who voted for it are permanently disqualified from holding office.

I would think that to go to war would require a vote of american people so by popular vote, americans would decide if they wanted to engage in war over in another country.
Pros being that the majority of americans would decide to make that investment and not a few sitting in Washington that never send their own kids to war.
Cons would be in attaining the popular vote. The constitution was written to allow an amendment by popular vote as it is written for the people and the people's voice rule the course. It would have been more impossible to do years ago but with the technology we have today, the people could vote and the majority rule.

A most needed amendment should be same-sex partner marriages should be allowed in all States. I am not gay but I do not see why some people should be regarded as 'less'.

Corporations are not persons. They have no rights, only privledges. They are dissoved after 100 years.
-
Elections are publicly funded. Senators and members of congress have term limits. Lets say 20 years for a senator and 10 years for a representative.

Everytime a new law is passed, an old one must be repealed

Term limits.