I like it. Give it a look.
Breaking – Power to the People! Repeal Amendment Gaining Strength
by James M. Simpson The great fear of all dictators is provoking rebellion before they are ready to handle it. So the Democrats, our Nation’s aspiring despots, have become refined experts at offering soothing, even encouraging, but always deceptive rhetoric about their sleazy, underhanded power grabs. Supported by a largely complicit mass media, they have brought our country to the breaking point.
But throughout history, the American people have repeatedly shown an amazing capacity for finding innovative solutions, often at the very last minute, to seemingly intractable crises. This fact of the indomitable, resourceful and defiant American spirit literally terrifies the left, and with good reason. They are now outed.
First we got the Tea Party, a genuine, spontaneous, grassroots revolution that rose up in less than a year to become the most dynamic, influential political movement in America. It gave us the stunning defeats of Democrat politicians in New Jersey, Virginia and even the late Senator Ted Kennedy’s seat in the Peoples Republic of Massachusetts. See my tribute flag to Ted above. Be sure to look up the Latin translation.
Finally, the Tea Party should be credited with the November 2010 election results in the U.S. House of Representatives and the state legislatures, where Republicans now hold the largest number since 1928. But we all know that even these gains are not enough, at least not yet, to stop the leftist juggernaut—led by the most radical President and facilitated by the most corrupt Congress in U.S. history. So Communists, er, Democrats, meet your nemesis, those damned innovative Americans, again.
The Daily Caller headline (November 24, 2010) says it all. Yet another unanticipated fastball has been hurled directly at the radical left’s destructive agenda. It is called the Repeal Amendment. Brainchild of distinguished Georgetown Constitutional Law Professor Randy Barnett, the proposal has gotten legs with the help of Florida attorney Marianne Moran, Executive Director of RepealAmendment.org.
The proposal calls for a constitutional amendment that would allow the states, by a two-thirds majority vote, to repeal objectionable federal legislation and regulations. Virginia Representative Eric Cantor, slated to be Majority Leader in the upcoming Congress, has gotten behind the movement, as has Virginia’s governor, and lieutenant governor, leaders in the state legislature and Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. Cantor articulates the justification well:
Washington has grown far too large and has become far too intrusive, reaching into nearly every aspect of our lives. In just the past few years, Washington has assumed more control over our economy and the private sector through excessive regulations and unprecedented mandates. Our liberty and freedom has lessened as the size and scope of the federal government has exploded. Massive expenditures like the stimulus, unconstitutional mandates like the takeover of health care, and intrusions into the private sector like the auto-bailouts have threatened the very core of the American free market.
Yeah, that about says it, although I would add the outrageous, blatantly corrupt misappropriation of trillions of taxpayer dollars for personal and political gain this administration and Congress have wantonly engaged in. These
people need jail.
The Amendment is straightforward and simple:
Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.
This Repeal Amendment was inspired by Barnett’s April 2009 groundbreaking article in the Wall Street Journal, which described Constitutional remedies for taking our country back. The Amendment was publicly proposed for the first time on September 15 of this year, and a mere two months later has garnered the support of prominent legislators in nine states: Virginia, Utah, New Jersey, Georgia, Texas, Minnesota, Florida, Indiana, and South Carolina. Virginia has led the way with support from Governor McDonnell, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, House of Delegates Speaker Bill Howell, Lieutenant Governor/Senate President Bill Bolling, in addition to Representative Cantor.
It has gotten a lot of play in the press too. On November 23rd, Professor Barnett and Virginia House Speaker Howell went on Fox Business News to discuss the proposal with Fox News’ commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano. Napolitano was ecstatic about the idea:
…this sounds almost too good to be true, if it could happen. We wouldn’t have unfunded mandates; the Tenth Amendment would reign supreme; the states would be sovereign within their own borders…
But the Judge had his doubts.
Adding amendments to the U.S. Constitution is a deliberately difficult task. According to Article V of the U.S. Constitution, there are two ways it can be accomplished:
1. Both Houses of Congress agree to propose an Amendment with a two-thirds majority vote.
2. Two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) pass a resolution to call for an Amendment Convention to vote on the amendment.
In both cases, the amendment must be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures (38 states).
What an amazing tool this could be for states that truly care about their people.
Of course, the number listed here... two-thirds... is far too high... and this amendment would only make sense if that number were reduced to a simple majority... 25 states plus one.
Is there any doubt that the fringe leftist states (California, New York, Oregon, Massachusetts and the like could band together to stop this Amendment from ever being invoked?) would oppose this as much as possible?
Nevertheless, it's the start of a necessary discussion... and about time.
.
4 comments:
If simple majorities worked, Bush Jr. would never have been president.
I'm sorry, Martin, but could you explain that a little further?
Bush received a simple majority of Electoral College votes. I believe we should have a simple majority of the herd of cats known as the several states to bring the federal government, which is, after all, SUPPOSED to be working for us, to heel.
I've never heard "Electoral College" and "simple" used in the same sentence.
The issue of federalism is so open to demagoeguery that rational debate about it is difficult. I hope and believe that if a bad law (perhaps mandatory health insurance) is terrible enough, it will inevitably be fixed or ash-canned via the system we have. I look to "prohibition" as an example.
While I freely admit that the Electoral College concept may not be simple, the outcome is the same: you get 50% plus one of the electoral votes... or the largest plurality... you get elected.
We've tried the "hope and change" shtick. It didn't work.
Implementing some version of this amendment would become the 800 pound guerrilla in the room whenever Congress or the president decided to screw us... again.
NOT having this system in place helped lead to the mess we have now. Because if such a system HAD been in place, "mandatory health insurance" would likely not even be in the lexicon today.
It is a difficult balance between a strong central government and a central government that is TOO strong. Putting this arrow in the state's quiver would be a change from what we're doing now... and is this where I point out that what we're doing now doesn't work?
Continuing what we have now while expecting a different outcome? Not a good idea. Further, advances in the information age makes speeding up the process that much more capable and possible... and the 14 years or so that it took for repeal of prohibition is plenty of time for our country to collapse... an outcome that might be avoidable if the fed is bitch-slapped by the states for screwing up at the federal level.
Post a Comment