To reduce the overhead for renewing old laws, I'd propose that each subsequent renewal of a law adds five years to the sunset clause for it (law passed – 5 years; 1st renewal – 10 years, 2nd – 15 years, etc). For past laws, we stagger their sunset clauses by the year they were passed so we don't have to review them all at once. Constitutional amendments (and the original constitution itself) are exempt.

Couple that with a law banning these massive omnibus bills, and you fix the system.

I think another key idea is limiting the current preferred approach of the statists, meaning the judiciary. I can think of a good Judicial Restraint amendment that works within our current system:

"This constitution is the supreme and constant law of the land binding these united states and limiting its federal government. Federal judges shall interpret this constitution and federal law consistent with its original meaning and limits. The states shall have the authority to enforce this by power to void judicial decisions and remove federal judges who interpret this Constitution in a manner inconsistent with original meaning and intent.
1. Any federal judge that takes affirmative part in a majority judicial decision that is later voided by the states shall be subject to removal at the conclusion of the current congressional session.
2. A judicial decision shall be considered to be voided when a simple majority of the state legislatures have passed a resolution with specific wording to appeal a judicial decision as identified by case name and the name of the court where the decision was promulgated."
3. No federal judge shall serve a term from the ratification of this amendment of more than 17 years. No former or sitting federal judge shall be eligible for election to the senate or presidency of the united states.

The postcolonial emphasis on landed franchise had its roots in English feudalism and later the gentry. It derives from a time when land was virtually the only valuable property one could own, apart from ships and slaves. Whereas today, the most valuable properties one can own are intangible: patents and copyrights.

I'd stick with a universal franchise, though I wouldn't mind seeing it revocable for things other than felonies.

1. Of the many things I could say about the home ownership requirement, I will say only this: Paris Hilton probably personally owns dozens of houses.

2. I'm not sure how judges can be competent if they are not lawyers — unless you are suggesting that judges would go to law school but never be practicing lawyers. It's true that much of what I do is not rocket science. But it does require facility with the law. The day your government comes to take your guns away, and you want to make an argument based on the Second Amendment, do you want someone who has never heard of incorporation to review your case?

3. Juries have, de facto, the power to nullify. Right now. And they do. Any prosecutor, and any defense attorney, will tell you that. It's not always pretty, either, as any study of the civil rights era will tell you.

4. I'm not convinced term limits are all good, but they are certainly worth discussing.

Here's what I have thought about over the past three decades of watching America's increasingly bizarre political Kabuki rituals:

1] Voter Qualification, Home Ownership (Condo or Townhouse fine) – outright ownership, no mortgage. Every citizen should be able to reasonably aspire to vote, but allowing any 18 year old to vote is democracy, and democracy is rule by fool because the masses are asses. Home ownership isn't based on IQ or education, just success.

2] Disqualify anyone with a law degree from serving as a judge or legislator, because it's a conflict of interest for lawyers to judge the law, or make the law. The system we have now is a racket: Lawyers make the law, judge the law, prosecute the law, defend us from the law, and oversee it all through the Bar Association. Limit lawyers to the adversarial part of the process where they belong. They have absolutely no business anywhere else.

3] Re-empower Juries: Long ago juries could decide whatever they wanted, and not just what an interest-conflicted lawyer-judge instructed them that they could decide. Including, by the way, that the law in question was unjust and should be stricken from the books. We need to get back to this to break the monopoly lawyers have on the American legal system.

4] A limit of two terms for every elective office. This would be like the military's "up or out" promotion policy for officers. A potential two terms in each state legislature, followed by two terms in each national legislature, followed by two terms as VP and then two terms as president ought to be a long enough political career for anyone, and only the very best could do it. Much of our political mediocracy is due to the power incumbents have to remain in office.

Oh, and I really like that the Vulcans have this third deliberative body. LOL!