What would it take to start the ball rolling for a constitutional amendment that states, in essence:
"The House of Representatives shall initiate no bill that does not spectify from its outset the exact Article and Section of the United States Constitution which enumerates and authorizes the proposed legislation as a legitimate constitutional function and delegated power of the General Government."
The purpose of this amendment is not to change the Constitution, per se, but to force Washington to adhere to it as it already stands. By demanding that every bill be required by law to state chapter-and-verse authority from the Constitution before being introduced, we would at least force representatives to consult the Constitution more frequently.
Additional force may be needed. We might add the clause:
"The Senate shall investigate, explore and validate the constitutional claim of each bill proposed by the House of Representatives in a written report made public before initiating any debate of the merits of said legislation."
To be followed, of course, by:
"The President shall investigate, explore and validate the constitutional claim(s) of each bill issuing from the Congress in a written report made public before affixing his signature."
With radio and television today, surely common sense proposals like this could quickly gain the 2/3 support needed to rein in the federal government with the help of patriots.
We have got to hold the feet of these people to our Constitution.
I’m afraid the rats are about to propose a constitutional ammendment that health care once they slaughter us and the Constitution (their version) as a right.
You’ll find this attached to every bill:
Article I Section 8: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
They think that allows them to do anything.
I would like to see an amendment that outlaws the socialist party, the communist party and any citizen that claims membership to any of these parties shall be deported. They are incompatible with our form of government.
How about:
“Congress shall meet on January 3 and adjourn for the year on January 4.”
What is the proposed remedy if the amendment is ignored? Who will enforce the remedy?
I’m afraid out problem is the practical enforcement of the Constitution. Congress being full of politicians are disinclined to limit their own power. The Federal courts being appointed by the same are similarly disinclined to limit Federal Power.
hell the only one even remotely inclined to limited federal power are the ones who stand to loses, namely those made subject to the same, the people and their States.
Here lays the problem, Unless you can get it to where the Constitution is practically enforced and interpreted by a party with a vested intrest in the goverment which it defines being limited, the document is little more then a peace of paper.
Until the Time of the U.S. Civil War the People and their States had a equal or superior right to enforce the Constitution then the Federal government and its court, this was practical cause they also held all the practical powers.(The Federal government was mostly impudent prior to the civil war, and thats the way it was meant to be for good reason!)
If we want to restore our system we have to clearly restore the balance of power back to the people and their states and away from the Federal government. That means the Constitution needs to be practically enforced and interpreted by the People and their states NOT the same government which is defined by it.
Any amendment should be looking towards that end.
I honestly would like to spell out that in matters of Law of the Federal constitution as it retains to the limits of federal power to be resolved by State courts.
The problem with any further amendments to the Constitution is that the Senate, Congress and the shoe shine boy in the White House would have to approve it. Good luck with that.
Don’t mess with the Constitution.
We don’t want to open that can of worms with the current electorate and current representatives/senators/POTUS.
Just fire those representatives/senators/POTUS who refuse to do the people’s will.
Vote them out.
Educate everyone within your sphere of influence.
The last thing I want to see, with this congress being as brazen as they are, is a Con-con.
Merlin to Mad Madame Mim: “One more rule: no cheating.”
The real problem is that we have leftist Constitutional Law professors educating our government leaders. We need that resolved.
Question...What is the primary function of Congress?
Answer...To protect the rights of the American Citizens and not compete with previous Congresses to see how many new laws can be passed each year.
Every bill will refer to Article I, Section 8 and claim that it ‘promotes the general welfare’ of the United States. Case closed.
The Founders arranged for a lifetime appointment for Supreme Court Justices because they didn’t want them politicized by periodic re-election. It was hoped that justice would be furthered by removing the justices from the realm of politics.
That’s not exactly working out that way.
I would suggest we achieve the aim of the Founders by a modified means: SCOTUS appointees serve a single (non-renewable) twenty-year term on the bench. Frankly, I prefer 10 years.
This retains the aim of depoliticizing the bench while rectifying the lack of accountability for decades.