Posted on 03/18/2010 5:05:02 PM PDT by Xottamoppa
As a rule I oppose most constitutional amendments, believing that most of our problems stem not from the way the Constitution was written and stands, but from ignoring it. That said, the Founders themselves allowed for amendment, so one can't dismiss the value of the flexibility. 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 3/4 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'd support it as an Amendment, not just a congressional bill.
WE NEED THIS, BACK TO THE CONSTITUTION! LET THERE BE A AMERICAN REVOLUTIONARY REVIVAL.
Most Americans would crap their pants if ever faced with a truly Constitutional governance. And that includes FReepers.
The problem isn’t the existing language of the Constitution. Leftists will pervert and subvert or create any Constitutional language necessary to achieve their ends, even if you amend it. “Congress shall make no law...”, “...the right of the people shall not be infringed”. You don’t get any more explicit than that, yet the 1st and 2nd Amendments are continually under attack from these tyrants. Where’s the abortion language you say? Funny, I wonder the same.
No offense, but that's just silly. The president is the chief executive not the chief justice. We already have a Supreme Court. In fact, I think the idea of a president unilaterally "validating" (whatever that means) the constitutionality of a bill itself violates the separation of powers specified in the Constitution.
Besides, exactly how would the president "investigate, explore and validate"? By commission or all by himself? And what happens when his decisions are disputed? They'd only wind up in the Supreme Court anyway.
I prefer the proposed Constitutional amendment from the closing passage of “Atlas Shrugged”-—Congress shall make no law abridging the right of production and trade.”
I’d like to add an amendment stating once a President was elected, two years later at the mid term elections, if he proved a totally incompetent ineligible goofball, he could be replaced at the midterms by a vote of no confidence, and the Vice President could then give it a shot. (I know, it’s a fairy tale, but one can dream.)
This wouldn’t accomplish anything, since the House would just write “Commerce Clause” under any bill and have the approval of the Supreme Court. Until we can get those ludicrous decisions rolled back, the Constitution has no teeth.
I appreciate the thought behind it but I think a constitutional amendment is no antidote for strong leadership.
If you’re going to amend the Constitution, at least make it worthwhile. “Congress shall make no law that does not pertain directly to national defense.”
Swell, just what we need......another thing for Congress to ignore.
The Constitution doesn't tell us what our rights are, it spells out what the US Government can do.
Any agreement on paper is only as good as the word of those who are a party to it.
The constitution already limits on what the Fed’s can do!!! If the Dem’s won’t follow & respect the constitution itself, why on earth would they care about a damn amendment?
If they can “deem” a bill passed without a vote, they sure as H3ll can “deem” a bill constitutional!!
The answer is to vote the marxist, liberals, and anti-american’s out of office. And get them out of our schools too!
Who cares, they don’t play by the constitution we got now.
True they seem to be creative even with the monosyllables of the Second Amendment (among others). the idea is to have external enforcement of our Constitution since expecting internal submission hasn’t worked. Just a little more fire to hold their feet to.
True they seem to be creative even with the monosyllables of the Second Amendment (among others). The idea is to have external enforcement of our Constitution since expecting internal submission hasn’t worked. Just a little more fire to hold their feet to.
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.