C

onstitutions, in general, have two parts:

I have my personal ideology. Some of it is indicated in these pages. This is not what I wish to sell you on. I want to interest you in the constitutional functions I have developed, i.e. the rules given in the second section. Every other idea is simply to convince you that change is both inevitable and necessary.

If I have managed to interest you in a new and simplified OS (operating system) for an advanced civilization, it is incumbent upon me to provide you with a feasible way of implementing that constitution, that is, a mechanism, controllable by you and independent of me, by which it can replace the current constitution within the framework of the present constitution.
"It is the right of the people to alter or abolish it." (This is the single, most important statement of the founding fathers ... It means they had the grace, intuition and intelligence to know that that which is not absolutely perfect must in time fail.)

First, it is important to note that to change the constitution it is not necessary to enlist the aid of or change the mind of a single politician. You could never do this anyway. You must only convince the people, en masse. The army will follow the will of the people (even against direct orders from politicians or the supreme court) when they see that that is what the people genuinely want. We don't have the type of army that mows down civilians with machine guns and it would be difficult for politicians to create such an army in fewer than several decades.

Second, if no significant percentage of the population can be interested in a new constitution go to the next section for practical directions.

Steps that can be taken

Since the American party advocates the institution of a new OS, it must live by that OS, i.e. the rules of the party must be simply the constitution it advocates. Easy.
Women may join and work for the American party but can only vote in an election apart from the men. They don't have final say (well ... they don't in the short run anyway).

Two problems: Cash and Insufficient interest

The cash problem (political parties need $ to function) is the easiest to solve. Like this ...
When you vote for someone, you give him say 5 bucks. If a guy represents 10 people, he has fifty bucks. He doesn't use this money but rather passes it up the chain of command for use by those who will need travelling expenses, etc. Presumably, if you represent only 10 people you won't have to go very far to meet others who have around ten votes. (To vote for them you must make their personal acquaintance ... remember?). Only when you must travel to another city or state would you dip into the cash you are forwarding up the chain. Whatever is left must be used to rent a convention hall for the highest few hundred representatives.
Maybe the guy with the cash will head for the hills with it? Doubtful. If he wasn't trustworthy he wouldn't have been entrusted with the far more valuable votes, would he? I don't see this as ever being a big problem.
Let's see ... if there are 10,000,000 interested people ... that's ~50,000,000 bucks ...
~90% of these give but don't acquire any votes ... ~9% have to go cross town in their own car and donate their time and gas money ... then 0.9% need say 200 bucks to drive to the next town over (gas, food reasonable lodging for two or three days ... most will probably donate that too) ... 0.09 percent have fairly large expenses (air fare).

of 10,000,000 American partiers:
9,000,000 stay home .............................-$0
900,000 donate gas money, etc. ............-$0
90,000 need $200 each .........................-$18,000,000
9,000 need $2000 each .........................-$18,000,000
900 need $3000 each plus ..................... -$2,700,000
rent hall for convention (give 'em one week) ..... what? ...... -$3,000,000?
Advertising on American Party Web Page & computing needs ... ~ -$1,000,000 per year?
left over from 50 million dollars ............. ~ $7,000,000
For five dollars more from each voter, the top 1,000 could be paid fifty thousand dollars per year as full time representatives.

Of course in the real world my math is inaccurate but it's OK for ballpark figures. It's all affordable. It's getting people interested enough so that the participants per square mile reaches the critical mass necessary to generate sustained action. Also note that costs per voter drop with greater participation.

An On-Line political party would really be cheap, easy and effective. The participants per square mile would be irelevant (replaced by participants per unit time). You wouldn't have to travel if you make the acquaintance of someone on-line (OK for a start but not so good in the long run).

hmmm ... The On-Line Party ... Party On-Line ... Party On ...