Posted on 03/05/2015 4:59:12 AM PST by cotton1706
If you are a thinking Republican—and those are rare these days—it has dawned on you that voting for a Republican majority in Congress has not accomplished much. GOP House Speaker John Boehner allowed a vote to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which effectively rubber-stamps President Obama’s executive amnesty for 5 million illegal immigrants. It passed with mostly Democratic votes.
The Congressional Republican leadership just endorsed Obama’s dangerous claim that Congress is irrelevant the moment it asserts its constitutional role as a co-equal branch with the executive.
So, what was all the hoopla about last November when Republicans swept into office on a wave of national disgust over the president’s executive amnesty and his dictatorial health care monstrosity?
Only one word applies to those who thought voting Republican meant “taking their country back”: Suckers!
Question: Why is there a national government in the District of Columbia?
Answer: It was established by delegates to a convention of states assembled in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1787.
Question: In the constitutional interplay between the individual states and the national government, who maintains the lion’s share of power?
Answer: The states. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people,” says the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at commdiginews.com ...
One more for the list.
No offense to republican Freepers, but many here have been preaching 'worthless puppies' for years. For the record, I dumped 'R' for 'I' long ago...we are all being played at our expense, to the enrichment of politicians and their cronies.
It's long past time for the States to start shedding Federal control & influence & retake this country.
Amen and pass the ammunition.
There is a danger in this but the greater danger lies in allowing things to progress as they have been.
I want one and only one amendment, to modify Article I as follows: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives, and these powers may not be delegated to any agency or entity under the control of the Executive or Judicial branches established herein, and may not be exercised by any officer subordinate to the Congress who is not subject to election by the People".
I think repeal of XVII would be great, but I do not believe that it could be ratified at present. The People will not consent at this time to amendments that appear to reduce their power.
My amendment could be sold as INCREASING the People's power by removing legislative and judicial authority from unelected officials.
Repeating here an illustrative example of how the power of Article V can be unlocked by the States to restore federalism:
************************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States and to restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
************************************************
Section 1.
A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2.
Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.
Section 3.
Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be overridden.
************************************************
If Section 1 above can be replaced with a repeal of the 17th, then that’s even better but it may be a hard sale. Section 1 above gets the job done by making US Senators pay attention to their State Legislators and at the same time requiring both to interact with the state voters.
I would strongly recommend the following must-see video be watched, consumed and studied:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZuV8JnvvA
And I would strongly recommend all to urge respective state senators and state representatives, and the people that work for them, to view it
Good points, most of which are addressed in post #8.
Federal statutes should be subject to REPEAL by 3/5 of the State legislatures, not to "override".
Federal court decisions should not be subject to "override", because that leaves the statute books a mess. And the question arises would such an override apply just to the parties to a case, or would it create new law (applying to all)? Good concept, unclear how it could work.
Likewise, "executive decisions of whatever form". The State legislatures are not administrators. Could they decide what kind of pencils to buy? (absurd example to illustrate the issue). The scope of Executive branch actions subject to reversal would need to be tightened up before writing an amendment.
I was going to respond once again to your repetitive, vacuous points, but realized that since you will never take the time to educate yourself on Article V, another informed response to you is a complete waste of time.
> “Federal statutes should be subject to REPEAL by 3/5 of the State legislatures, not to “override”.”
> “Federal court decisions should not be subject to “override”, because that leaves the statute books a mess. And the question arises would such an override apply just to the parties to a case, or would it create new law (applying to all)? Good concept, unclear how it could work.”
Good point. I suppose the terms ‘repealed or made void’ could substitute for ‘overridden’. But the important thing is that state legislators start the debate on terms, definitions, intent and meaning ASAP. The COS Project is one group that can facilitate and expedite that.
I will keep repeating the example with modifications in threads so that people have a concrete idea of what the outcome can look like.
> “Likewise, “executive decisions of whatever form”. The State legislatures are not administrators. Could they decide what kind of pencils to buy? (absurd example to illustrate the issue). The scope of Executive branch actions subject to reversal would need to be tightened up before writing an amendment.”
Obama has shown how crafty his people can be at evading the consequences of their actions, orders, directives, winks and private emails, etc. Something must enable state legislators to rein in the Executive. I don’t believe 3/5’s of states will ‘void’ matters deemed absurd by the casual observer.
I am going to modify it a bit with your input and post it to another thread created by Jim Robinson. I would like your input on reining the executive branch.
It's probably the last hope to make repairs within boundaries of the law. Will it be enough? Nobody knows; there are many factors at play. But it does not hurt, and it does not preclude other solutions.
I trust the reader unfamiliar with the various threads debating Article V will educate himself about the overwhelming body of persuasive arguments in favor of invoking our Constitution to save our Constitution.
From article: “The point is this: If you are expecting ‘change’ to come from Washington, you have been brainwashed into believing America’s Baghdad on the Potomac is the only legitimate seat of power.”
I’ve given up on the feds fixing themselves. Fuhgeddaboudit.
Neither Article V AND state nullification of unconstitutional federal acts need the feds to launch - both are state generated and both need to be launched. Article V would be less “secessionary” but requires a lot of steps done correctly, and needs federal cooperation to IMPLEMENT.
State nullification is entirely an independent state action from beginning to end. The game there is about how the feds respond (cut off fed funds, of course) and how prepared the state is to deal with financial independence and other results of anticipated federal responses.
State nullification of unconstitutional federal acts is not an outlier, fringe concept, but was a contemplated alternative as a legitimate aspect of constitutional federalism from the founding of our country – see link below.
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/dunkin/150302
Neither Article V OR state nullification of unconstitutional federal acts need the feds to launch...
I agree. 100%.
Others have cited the need for Conservatives to focus on their own local/State Reps to change this reliance on Federal influence & dollars.
Federal influence & control over the States has spread like a cancer, though intentional. Until the States have the political will (collective or otherwise) to say "NO!" (and they won't so long as the populace is addicted to those Federal $$, regardless the form), I regretfully refer back to my last comment. However, I agree that it is truly the only viable option.
We’re in agreement my FRiend. Need many more saying the same thing.
So are you suggesting we vote Republican next time? Or that we just start shooting immediately?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.