[Phil153]

Many of your point are wrong or ineffectual:

1) I would keep the current Constitution in its present form for the most part except that I would add to it additional protections.
The current constitution is very likely a cause of political corruption. Parliamentary systems are inherently less corrupt that presidential ones.

3) I would end the income tax in favor of strictly business-related taxes. The payroll tax would also be gone.
So you give money to the buyer of non capital goods and take it away from the buyer of capital goods and innovators. Doesn't seem like good policy to me.

4) No Social Security, Medicare, or entitlements
So people either live on the street, or are entirely reliant on charity? What does the state do with the millions of mentally ill? What about older people who've worked and paid large amounts of taxes all their lives under the assumption that social security will be around? Do you just cut off their benefits? Some states just don't have the money to pay these kinds of schemes.

5) The only departments in the federal government would be those that relate to the military (and intelligence) (defense), diplomacy (state), taxation (treasury), law enforcement (only those crimes which are interstate), elections, and other oversight entities made necessary by this list. That’s it.
Other government departments apart for the ones you list take up a very tiny fraction of government resources, and many do very good work.

8) Believing that a non-transparent government is a larger threat to democracy than any external threat, the need for transparency would win out over intelligence gathering in cases where the two conflicted
Who decides, and how is that system of decision making different from now? Are you saying that all intelligence data should be publicly published? If not, who decides?

9) I would write in explicit protections for the electoral system
Great idea

10) Money would largely be removed from politics. Business entities could not contribute at all to campaigns. Only people could contribute and only to an inflation-adjusted amount of say, $5,000. There would be no loopholes allowed at all. No $10K-a-plate fundraisers, no PACs, no organizations like the Sierra Club, the NRA, or unions.
So you'd do away with freedom of association? lol @ no loopholes. Businesses would just get employees to donate on their behalf - this happens already to some extent.

12) Business practices that favor larger businesses over smaller ones would be explicitly illegal. Volume discounts, for instance, in business would be completely illegal.
Good luck policing that. Add another government bureau to your list.

13) Antitrust legislation would remain intact and be more strictly enforced.
Again, good luck enforcing that. +1 for another government bureau

15) Supreme Court decisions would be made by randomly-selected jurors and not by justices.
Worst idea ever. You destabilize the authority and precedence of Supreme Court decisions and let the popular opinions of 12 randomly selected individuals, with no knowledge of law and the broader issues at play, decide extremely important issues. How are 12 layman going to rule on the constitutionality of abortion? Decisions will lack expert reasoning, the creation of tests and rules, and some issues where popular opinion is split (i.e. abortion) will come down to the luck of the draw.

17) Bribery or extortion of a public official for the means of manipulating the system is akin to treason, punishable by death if convicted.
There are already hefty prison terms for this stuff.

18) Attempts to manipulate the system by circumventing or exploiting laws is also considered treason if convicted by a jury and punishable by death. Treason can occur on the federal, state, or local levels.
Why not cut off their hands instead? The reality is that no one wants to live in such a country as you describe. People generally only support the death penalty for the taking of life.