Skip to comments.A Summary of Mark Levinís Proposed Amendments
Posted on 08/25/2013 2:36:07 PM PDT by Jacquerie
Amendment to establish congressional term limits. No more than twelve total years combined in house and senate.
Amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment. Governors may fill vacancies to fill out remainder of terms. Upon two thirds vote, state legislatures may remove their senators.
Amendment to establish twelve year term limits on scotus. On three-fifths vote, and within twenty four months of a ruling, congress or the states may override scotus decisions. These overrides are not subject to judicial review.
Congress shall submit preliminary budget to president by first Monday in May for the next fiscal year. Should congress/president not adopt a budget by October 1st, the budget shall be set at 5% less than the last years budget. Outlays no greater than receipts and no greater than 17.5% of previous years GDP. Congress may suspend the 17.5% limit for one year on a roll call vote of 3/5 of members. National debt to require 3/5 roll call vote. Maximum limit of 15% income tax. Deadline for filing tax returns shall be the day before elections to federal office. Ban on tax of decedents estate.
All federal departments expire unless individually reauthorized in stand-alone legislation every three years. A joint committee of congress shall review and approve all executive branch regulations that exceed $100 million in economic burden. There is a six month window. If the committee does not approve within that time, the regulation dies.
Congressional power to regulate commerce does not extend to activity within a state, regardless of effect on interstate commerce. No entity may be compelled to participate in trade or commerce.
Property owners shall be compensated for actual seizure or when a market value reduction of $10,000 or more occurs through regulation, interference, financial loss caused by any governmental entity.
State legislatures, on two-thirds vote, may amend the constitution. Six year limit from first state to ratify. No state may rescind or ratify during the six year limit.
All congressional bills shall be placed on the public record for a minimum of thirty days before final votes. Two-thirds of congress may override. Three-fifths vote of state legislatures may nullify/repeal a federal statute or executive branch regulation that exceeds $100 million in economic burden. Nullification is not subject to any court review. States have two years to exercise this authority.
Photo ID required to register and vote. States will provide them at no cost if necessary. Excepting military personnel, there shall be no early voting more than thirty days prior to the date of the election. More restrictions to reduce third party registration and voting fraud.
Restoring the American Republic ping!
I’m on board.
We should all be contacting our state representatives and educating them about this.
It may be our last best chance to change things.
Levin’s discussions on the Constitution are as quaint as discussing Shakespeare or poems by Robert Frost.
The founders made their arguments and backed each one up with musket.
No state may rescind or modify it during the six year limit.
Holy crap. I agree with every one of these.
Why change the number of legislatures required to ratify any amendment though? It’s 3/5 now, no?
There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.
Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.
Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:
The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.
Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
That is how we achieved independence. As opposed to Magna Charta and the English Bill of Rights which were extracted from unwilling princes, we formed a government in an unusual way . . . through peaceful deliberation.
Need to add that all members of congress are subject to the laws they pass. No exclusion or special privilege allowed
Term limits! The Founders never intended Congress to be a lifetime position.
Mark may have something designed for this, as well, but this is great. Thank you!
No congressional or scotus involvement necessary or possible.
It is federalism at its best.
Sounds like anti-Federalism, no?
The statists in DC who profit so much from the system they corrupted are incapable of reform.
Number three stinks badly. No matter how attractive it might look on its surface, it actually embeds judicial supremacy, which is the opposite of the constitutional form of representative self-government given to us by the founders. Bad court opinions, and bad laws, are already null and void, according to the fundamental natural law principles laid down by men like Cicero, and Aquinas, and Blackstone, and Hamilton.
Glaringly missing from his list is any amendment to protect marriage, or innocent human life in the womb. A pretty big oversight, considering where the country is right now.
In any case, the calling of a constitutional convention at a time when our political class is rank with those who won’t even keep their oaths to support and defend the Constitution we’ve already got, and who lack the most basic principles upon which our Constitution is premised, is a supremely bad idea.
JUST SAY NO, NO TO THE CONCON!
While an excellent argument can be made for term limits (which, along with elimination of the fat pensions, perks and LAME DUCK SESSIONS, I favor), I would offer that, currently, our chances of getting them are somewhere between slim and none.
The sad fact that we are even discussing them is a manifestation of the even sadder fact that, until recently, Americans have grown complacently inattentive to the actions of and abuses by government at all levels. The phrase Let George do it springs to mind. More folks know the names of the characters on Lost and Dancing With The Stars than know who allegedly represents them in the House.
Having said that, I must respectfully disagree with calls for a Constitutional Convention. I do so for the same reasons I joined with others to repel the push for a ConCon during the Carter maladministration.
Please recall that the FIRST ConCon was convened to REVISE the Articles of Confederation and, while it produced a radically different and arguably superior national charter, the problem to which I referred at the top would almost certainly lead to a loss of even more of the freedoms too many of us now take for granted.
A second ConCon would be populated by current STATE political elites who have been selected BY their fellow STATE political elites. Think Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Fortney Pete Stark, Maxine Waters or their philosophical clones etc. and be afraid. Be VERY AFRAID!
Unfortunately for us and our liberties, General Washington, Messers. Madison, Franklin, Adams, Sherman and the others will not be there this time. Once in session, THERE WOULD BE NO PRACTICAL WAY TO CONTROL THE NEW CAST OF CHARACTERS.
But, say you, the PEOPLE would have to ratify any such actions. Please recall that, today, these would be the same people who gave us Barrack Obama and hundreds of progressives on Capitol Hill in 2008.
Yes, so far 2010 appears to have been a SLIGHT course change and, no, Im not giving up on the people. In our system, they should, within Constitutional constraints, have the last word.
Mr. Jeffersons advice in that area comes to mind:
I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.
Those of us who wish to save this nation and return it to a condition the Founders would again recognize must continue to inform their discretion.
Check out GOOOH as a better way to get this country back on the rails (and run most of these incumbent bums out of town on one). WWW.GOOOH.COM.
I don’t agree with the amendment allowing Congress to override the Supreme Court. If a party gets enough seats, they could do anything they want, including effectively nullifying one of the first 10 amendments.
I will let you guess the first one that would fall.
“...If a party gets enough seats,
hey could do anything they want,
including effectively nullifying
one of the first 10 amendments...”
That is already true today.
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.