Posted on 01/19/2016 6:42:18 PM PST by Kaslin
My governor, the Honorable Greg Abbott of Texas, sallied forth the other day with a plan to revise the Constitution in the interest of returning power to the people. Because of this antique notion, whole cans of rhetorical trash have been emptied on my governor's head.
I don't wonder at all. When you propose reversing the present national direction, rolling back half a century and more of concentrated power in Washington, D. C., you don't expect valentines. The "progressive" establishment loves what it has gained through riding down constitutional limits. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are pledged to the objective of more and more rules in Washington, D.C., never mind what limits the Constitution would appear to impose on that goal.
I do wonder about something else. Gov. Abbott has as much chance of enacting his full nine-point "Texas Plan" as Barack Obama has of falling out with The New York Times. I think we need, all the same, to praise the governor for embarrassing the political establishment with a catalogue of its sins against constitutional government.
Not that the Constitution itself is broken, Abbott emphasizes. "What is broken is our nation's willingness to obey the Constitution and to hold our leaders accountable to it.'' All three branches of government "have wandered far from the roles that the Constitution sets out for them. ... We have forgotten what our Constitution means, and with that amnesia, we also have forgotten what it means to be governed by laws instead of men" -- or women, you could add in view of present political circumstances.
The governor's point lies beyond easy contradiction. The habit has grown upon Americans over the past half century of seeing the federal government slip-slide around language meant not to facilitate but to thwart grabs for power. For instance, our three-branch governmental setup uses "checks and balances" in the constitutional text to restrain one branch from lording over the others. That is, until President Obama issues yet another executive order stating how things are going to be in the absence of congressional "cooperation."
What does Abbott propose we do about such threats to the Constitution? He would have a constitutional convention called by the states to put forth and ratify nine purifying and restorative amendments to the grand old document. The founders wrote into Article V of the Constitution that very possibility.
Under the amendments that Abbott proposes, administrative agencies couldn't create federal law or preempt state law. Two-thirds of the states could override a U.S. Supreme Court decision or a federal law or regulation. The high court itself would have to muster seven votes to strike down "a democratically enacted law." State officials could sue federal officials in federal court for supposed overreach of power.
And so on, to the ultimate recovery, Abbott suggests, of the limits meant to preserve liberty by preserving some large measure of popular authority over government.
What are the odds of the Texas Plan's springing to actual life? Oh, the odds, I imagine, of sunstroke at the North Pole. From what I witness in Texas -- scornful newspaper editorials, taunts on the Internet, etc. -- Abbott's own state would prove a hard sell when it comes to voting for a convention. Moreover, the efficacy of reining in human desire through paper restrictions is always in question. Witness Abbott's own censure of the current generation's unwillingness to respect such constitutional barriers to power-grabbing as already exist.
Is the Texas Plan, then, ready for black crepe and graveside prayers? America's apparent distaste even for talking about the ongoing collapse of resistance to federal encroachment -- Obamacare comes to mind, as does the White House war on fossil fuels -- isn't exactly encouraging.
Do we shrug at honest, heavily footnoted arguments for keeping the country free? So much the worse for us, then. My governor, as I say, may not win this round, but if he pries open a few influential minds to what goes on among us -- ah! Didn't Mr. Adams do as much, and Mr. Jefferson and a few others of liberty-loving disposition? One wonderful thing about conversation is the places it can lead
The Constitution will continually be weakened and destroyed as long as massive, leftist-progressive government exists - and that is supported 100% by our fiat, unbacked monetary system.
Eliminate the Federal Reserve, return money and interest rates to the free-market, out of political/ideological control, and the USA will immediately return to limited, Constitutional government.
Don’t do that - and reform will be impossible.
I’m for jailing any Congressman or -woman who sponsors legislation judged unconstitutional. For life. Since the Supreme Court can’t be trusted to make such judgments anymore, I’ll do it myself.
Stop allowing parasites to vote!
Congress has been reworking the Constitution since the beginning until it means little today. The best example would be the 2nd amendment.
There have been so many laws put into effect over the years that the true meaning of the 2nd amendment doesn’t even resemble the original intent.
How about FOLLOWING the Constitution.
The 16th and 17th amendments broke the Constitution on purpose. These so called “progressive” amendments have worked flawlessly.
With all the craziness that has been added to it, it needs to be reintroduced to the people. The real document needs to be seen by people who have no idea of its original intent, but only hear the siren calls of politicians to destroy it even more.
I think the best example is the Commerce Clause. It's been nuanced into an essentially open-ended claim of authority with no objectively discernible limit. You'd be hard pressed to find anything closer to a Constitutional Pandora's Box than Wickard v Filburn.
Seconded.
Another great example.
Get rid of the ill-conceived 17th Amendment and let state lawmakers once again uniquely elect state sovereignty-respecting federal senators as the Founding States had originally intended for the system to work.
After all, why allow corrupt, popularly elected Washington cartel senators to help the House pass unconstitutional bills, bills that not only steal 10th Amendment-protected states powers but also state revenues uniquely associated with those powers, when that same Senate also confirms state sovereignty-ignoring justices who then wrongly declare that such laws are constitutional?
In fact, a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohbiited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
”Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Remember in November !
So if patriots elect Trump, or whatever conservative they elect, they will also need to elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will work within its Section 8-limited powers to support the president.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices confirmed by previous generations of likewise state sovereignty-ignoring senators.
The cases holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep arms were all decided by a vote of 5-4. So under Abbott's proposal, all of those "democratically enacted" gun control laws would still be valid.
Greg Abbott is spot on correct. The talkie heads are idiots.
The prospect of an Article V convention is popular in Texas.
Leftist can pound sand.
It is TIME to DownSize DC! Close entire Rogue/Unconstitutional Departments, including their SWAT Teams.
How is that concept foreign to what Governor Abbott has proposed?
Makes a lot of sense to me.
I like our Governor.
It doesn’t matter what the constitution actually says as long as corrupt leftist and Big-Gov politicians and Supreme Court Justices ignore and/or twist it’s meaning to push the leftist agenda.
That can only be done by re-federalizing the government via Article V. Mark Levin's suggested amendments are superb and would extensively redistribute power with the states.
And therein lies the rub - getting rid of the 17th .. what venue (with a snowball's chance) do you see to make that happen?
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.