Posted on 08/19/2016 6:37:58 PM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
They have no jurisdiction. None.
Under what possible provision of the Constitution does it give the Supreme Court the authority to decide who can or can't be a delegate to a convention of the States?
You are engaging in Liberal Think.
A better approach that wouldn’t require a constitutional amendment is expanding the House to include more members. Ideally, there should be one Rep per 50k voters.
I understand this makes the House significantly larger. However, it dilutes the power of each and every one of those bastards. Moreover, it would be inline with the US Constitution.
If we’d do this, I believe you’d see the following things happen :
1. Smaller congressional districts. Far less gerrymandering.
2. Fewer career politicians ... The House would be a madhouse as the founders intended. You’d have to have convictions to spend 2 years there.
3. Less cash required to campaign since, again, districts would be smaller.
4. More accurate Representation. There would be more of a chance that a candidate that isn’t aligned with your beliefs wouldn’t be the polar opposite.
5. Less corruption. In theory, it’d be pretty damn hard to buy half the House if there were thousands of members vs. the size of a typical high school class.
I think House expansion is the way to go. It’d be a leap in getting the FedGov under control ... In my opinion anyway.
I believe you are possibly correct about the President being able to replace certain political appointees at the head of some of the departments and agencies. I believe the agencies are part of the Executive Branch, but Congress legislates them into existence and then legislates their funding. So Congress would have to abolish the Department. I searched Department of Education and found this:
“Ribicoff was quick to support the President’s decision, and in March he and Senators Magnuson, Humphrey, Pell, and Nunn introduced yet another Department of Education Organization Act. The bill did not come up
for a vote in the House during the same session, and the entire proceedings began all over again the following year. This time the bill did reach the House, where it passed in a close vote. President Carter signed the bill into law on October 17th, 1979, finally ending a struggle of almost 150 years to establish a Cabinet-level Department of Education.”
I don’t agree with this proposal but I’m glad he’s willing to look at different issues and shake things up a bit.
We so need that.
As well, within and Article V ‘Convention of the States’, the states should eliminate any amendment or federal law which was either not properly ratified to begin with, or acted to reduce the authority of the States and their Voters.
Additionally, the Article V convention needs to constitutionally address and lawfully force the immediate redaction of ALL Constitutionally Undelegated Federal authority BACK to the STATES!
Term Limits for Congress and also for SCOTUS.
Will never happen — these soulless critters will protect each other.
Regarding the size of the House of Representatives...
Does the house have too much power or too little power?
What is the proper balance?
Should the size of the house be fixed at xx times the number of the senate?
Originally, representatives were about 2 1/2 times in number as senators
(65 vs 26)...
...now, it is 4 1/2 times in number (435 vs 100).
...now, to keep the original 2 1/2 to 1 ratio, it would translate to 250 representatives.
Should the size of the house be fixed by population size
(example: 1 rep per xxx # of citizens)?
Originally, representatives were 1 per 30,000 in population
...now, that would translate to 10,000 members in the house of representatives.
I’d prefer it be set by population. It’d scale upwards with each census.
As far as the Senate is concerned ... Id like to see a few States break up into smaller ones.
Ugh ... I am typing on my phone right now ... I will reply with more tomorrow when I’m on my PC (I hate typing on this thing) ...
I am commenting from the perspective that the big problem in DC are corrupt politicians ... As many have pointed out, we also need to reduce the number of bureaucrats.
Finally, Senate seats need to go back to appointment vs. this Democratic nonsense ... Governor term limits should help keep the turnover rate there fairly decent.
Also, if we would have a large House ... No exotic pay and benefits for all the new members :-).
Term limits of 2 each of senate and HR; no chance to become entrenched, focus would be on doing for “we the people” instead of them - think about a simple example of getting post offices installed in stupid places...pork...running the country more like a business and a “real capitalist” one, not a crony capitalist/fascist/socialist one.
The only aspect of power that increases with tenure in Congress is the corruption. Sure, it’s powerful, but that kind of power doesn’t serve the people.
It serves the members of Congress. Let’s try to get people to understand this.
Term limits are badly needed.
A vote for your congressman is very different from supporting or not supporting term limits in general.
They have the same power they have always had, they just choose to use it selectively mostly for things that have nothing to do with helping the people or the Constitution.
I predict if Trump is elected they will suddenly discover they have power after all.
Like my brother calls them: “Glorified messenger boys”. That one cracked me up because that’s exactly what they are aren’t they. You can’t have the entire population descending upon Washington to have their voice heard, so we send these “messenger boys” instead to rep us, to let our voices be heard. The only problem though is these messenger boys rip us off, demand they be treated like royalty and think they are above the law when they are nothing more than public servants.
They already are. Congressmen when they come into office are likely going to keep all the hired help no matter who their previous boss was. Congress has handed all the hard work off to staff or regulatory agencies that rule with the stroke of a pen.
Well that proves just how effective the Constitution is in restraining tyranny.
Unionized members of the bureaucracy thanks to John Kennedy.
With all due respect to mom & pop, it doesn’t help when parents don’t make sure that their children are taught about the fed’s constitutionally limited powers the way that the Founding States had intended for those powers to be understood.
Voters on both sides are ready for term limits!
Amen to that!
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.