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

To: SusanD

Source: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h924.html

The 27th Amendment is intended to prevent members of Congress from granting themselves pay raises during the course of a session. This is a refinement of Article I, Section 6, the provision granting Congress the authority to establish compensation for its membership.

James Madison introduced this idea to the First Congress, meeting in New York City in the fall of 1789. Congress passed the proposed amendment by the necessary two-thirds vote, but three-fourths of the states did not ratify the measure until 1992. Over the years various states would approve the proposal, but new states had joined the Union, keeping the ratification standard out of reach.

Public displeasure with Congressional pay raises in the 1980s sparked a revival of interest in the measure. In 1992 Michigan became the 38th state to ratify, pushing support past the three-fourths requirement.

Later amendment proposals have often carried an expiration date. Those measures that cannot achieve the mandated three-fourths ratification vote by the states are voided; they can be revived only by restarting the entire process.




As you can see, your argument has a major hole in it. None of the current legislators were present in the passing of the 27th Amendment through our legislature.


3 posted on 04/13/2005 3:37:01 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: coconutt2000

Are you saying that none of the legislators who sat in Michigan in 1992 are still alive? Who are the framers? I say they are the people who voted for the measures that become part of the constitution. I haven't conducted a study but I bet that some of the people who voted (rather yea or nay)in the Michigan legislature are still alive. So you are right, I didn't research exactly how this measure was introduced and passed but I did see that it didn't pass and become a part of the constitution until 13 years ago. My point is exactly right. If you want to change the constitution AMEND it. Don't have individual judges or even 9 supremes decide that they see something in the constitution which was never there.


6 posted on 04/13/2005 12:21:16 PM PDT by SusanD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

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