Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The National Debt Relief Amendment
RestoringFreedom.org ^

Posted on 03/23/2012 10:06:40 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican

The National Debt Relief Amendment: “An increase in the federal debt requires approval from a majority of the legislatures of the separate States.”

Re-gaining control of the debt limit is not a partisan issue. All within the Washinton bubble: politicians of all partisan flavors & their disgustingly lazy MSM lap dogs; they're simply incapable of doing their jobs! Last Congress maxed out the last of the credit cards. This Congress co-signed our grandchildren for "payday loans." It's time to go Constitutional upon them!

Two states on board, twenty-two seriously considering, six with toes in the water. Legislative kits available for personally lobbying your home state legislators. Time For ACTION!

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

(Excerpt) Read more at restoringfreedom.org ...


TOPICS: Announcements; Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: articlev
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein
1 posted on 03/23/2012 10:06:43 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican

I suspect that a Constitutional Amendment will require more than a perfunctory response from Washington.


2 posted on 03/23/2012 10:15:26 PM PDT by HMS Surprise (Chris Christie can still go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HMS Surprise

Greetings HMS Surprise:

The average Washington bubble occupant appears to reside within a partisan world of demagougary. Politicians might find it more convenient blaming the fifty separate States for holding them accountable and then do the right thing; in lieu of the ever-so-predictable “other party’s” fault.

Pray for our republic,
OLA


3 posted on 03/23/2012 10:41:25 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (In God I trust, all others provide citations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican
When was the constitution last amended? I remember the ERA equal rights amendment that did not pass so what are the chances of this getting traction?
4 posted on 03/23/2012 10:45:46 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Grammar & spelling maybe wrong, get over it, the world will not come to an end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953

Greetings guitarplayer1953:

Of consequence: proposed March 10, 1971 became 26th Amendment July 5, 1971.

Symbolic: 1992, 207 years afterward.

Cheers,
OLA


5 posted on 03/23/2012 11:10:59 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (In God I trust, all others provide citations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican

The passage of the 17th Amendment (direct election of US Senators) in 1913 inverted the relationship of the Federal government to the States. Previously, US Senators were elected by their respective state legislatures and as such reported to and protected the interests of the states in federal matters. Now the federal government is in control of the states and one of the fruits of that has been the willingness of the federal government to spend far more money than it takes in.

We can debate tax policy and tax rates all day, but what counts is spending. Economist Milton Friedman pointed out the obvious: the federal government must get the money it spends by borrowing, inflating or taxing. Since the federal spending is so out of balance, the best way to throttle its powers over all of us is to forbid it to borrow any more.

As a political reality, people today are far more worried about the level of government debt than ever before. So, the time may be sufficiently ripe to enable such an amendment to pass.

We must do everything we can to put the Leviathan State back in it cage before we find the cage it is putting us in has a lock on the door that we cannot pick.


6 posted on 03/24/2012 5:23:42 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican

The passage of the 17th Amendment (direct election of US Senators) in 1913 inverted the relationship of the Federal government to the States. Previously, US Senators were elected by their respective state legislatures and as such reported to and protected the interests of the states in federal matters. Now the federal government is in control of the states and one of the fruits of that has been the willingness of the federal government to spend far more money than it takes in.

We can debate tax policy and tax rates all day, but what counts is spending. Economist Milton Friedman pointed out the obvious: the federal government must get the money it spends by borrowing, inflating or taxing. Since the federal spending is so out of balance, the best way to throttle its powers over all of us is to forbid it to borrow any more.

As a political reality, people today are far more worried about the level of government debt than ever before. So, the time may be sufficiently ripe to enable such an amendment to pass.

We must do everything we can to put the Leviathan State back in its cage while we still can.


7 posted on 03/24/2012 5:24:18 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

Greetings theBuckwheat:

Very well stated, dear FReeper.

Cheers,
OLA


8 posted on 03/24/2012 2:34:41 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (In God I trust, all others provide citations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican
Thanks for the info I barely remember 1971, eighteen at the time when you could buy 3.2 beer at a bar and the bars were full of kids in those days including myself.
9 posted on 03/24/2012 4:28:30 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Grammar & spelling maybe wrong, get over it, the world will not come to an end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953

Greetings guitarplayer1953:

The 26th Amendment was very significant in your sake; old enough for war but not old enought to vote. If 1953 is your birth year, guessing Ground Hog Day 1972 was an important lottery drawing day at your parent’s home? Draft ended my freshman year in high school.

Cheers,
OLA


10 posted on 03/24/2012 10:50:54 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (In God I trust, all others provide citations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OneLoyalAmerican
By 1972 I was deemed unfit for military service. Due to the fact I had a class E felony for being caught with barbiturates. The reason I know this is I had tried to join the navy went through the first round of test flying colors second round of test at a local air force base did real well there to. Though I was on my way to the navy when the recruiter came by our house and said that because of the drug problems of vets in VN they could not take me.
11 posted on 03/26/2012 3:03:31 PM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Grammar & spelling maybe wrong, get over it, the world will not come to an end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Another drop in the US credit rating, Bump.


12 posted on 04/08/2012 10:13:05 PM PDT by OneLoyalAmerican (In God I trust, all others provide citations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat
The 17th did two horrible things.

First, it simply destroyed federalism.

Second, our Framers never seriously considered popular election as the basis for both houses of Congress. Excessive representative democracy in the States was one of several reasons for the Constitutional Convention and they knew it was fatal to base republican legislation entirely on the passions of the people.

Also, they would spit blood at the thought of six year terms for popularly elected officials. The primary reason we do not have one year terms for Congressmen was the difficulty of 18th century travel.

13 posted on 05/08/2012 3:20:32 AM PDT by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson