Ever feel like you agree with someone on principle but get angry when you realize their an idiot. I was reading an article by David Rivkin and Lee Casey of the Wall Street Journal and just about blew my top off. I agree with what their saying but they kind of missed history class.
From the Wall Street Journal
For nearly a hundred years, federal power has expanded at the expense of the states—to a point where the even the wages and hours of state employees are subject to federal control. Basic health and safety regulations that were long exercised by states under their “police power” are now dominated by Washington.
The courts have similarly distorted the Constitution by inventing new constitutional rights and failing to limit governmental power as provided for in the document. The aggrandizement of judicial power has been a particularly vexing challenge, since it is inherently incapable of correction through the normal political channels.
There is a way to deter further constitutional mischief from Congress and the federal courts, and restore some semblance of the proper federal-state balance. That is to give to states—and through them the people—a greater role in the constitutional amendment process.
The idea is simple, and is already being mooted in conservative legal circles. Today, only Congress can propose constitutional amendments—and Congress of course has little interest in proposing limits on its own power. Since the mid-19th century, no amendment has actually limited federal authority.
But what if a number of states, acting together, also could propose amendments? That has the potential to reinvigorate the states as a check on federal power. It could also return states to a more central policy-making role.
The Framers would have approved the idea of giving states a more direct role in the amendment process. They fully expected that the possibility of amendments originating with the states would deter federal aggrandizement, and provided in Article V that Congress must call a convention to consider amendments anytime two-thirds of the state legislatures demand it. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist Papers of this process: “[W]e may safely rely on the disposition of the state legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”
What the Framers did not anticipate, however, was the profound reaction to their own “runaway” convention in 1787. By junking the Articles of Confederation in favor of a new Constitution, they gave us strong and stable government. They also showed exactly what constitutional conventions can do. As a result, no similar body has ever been assembled, and even suggesting a new convention can freeze the marrow in constitutional lawyers.
Hmmm…. the ability of the states to directly make amendments. Where have I heard that before. Oh. Wait! It’s called the Senate! Well, the old senate. Maybe if they read the constitution they would have noticed that in 1913 the seventeenth amendment was ratified making the senate directly voted in by the people. Before this legislation Senators were elected by the State Legislatures. Which is why we have a bicameral congress, one part is elected directly by the people and the other is by the state government (which is elected directly by the people). It was this awesome nifty thing that allowed the states to make sure one state’s population couldn’t control another state through the Federal government. The State would be able to appoint people that would ensure that the states stayed powerful and the federal government wouldn’t slowing but surely make them obsolete.
So!? Why not just redact the 17th amendment? We did it to prohibition and that turned out well for us! I mean it is stupid to have two houses in congress that are elected to do the same job by the same people. It’s like having two carpenters build 2 different chairs, argue about the best design of a chair, then compromise and build a third chair and then charge you for three chairs; but you get one.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 at 6:08 pm and is filed under Trackback Commentary.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Sometimes Journalists are Morons
Ever feel like you agree with someone on principle but get angry when you realize their an idiot. I was reading an article by David Rivkin and Lee Casey of the Wall Street Journal and just about blew my top off. I agree with what their saying but they kind of missed history class.
From the Wall Street Journal
Hmmm…. the ability of the states to directly make amendments. Where have I heard that before. Oh. Wait! It’s called the Senate! Well, the old senate. Maybe if they read the constitution they would have noticed that in 1913 the seventeenth amendment was ratified making the senate directly voted in by the people. Before this legislation Senators were elected by the State Legislatures. Which is why we have a bicameral congress, one part is elected directly by the people and the other is by the state government (which is elected directly by the people). It was this awesome nifty thing that allowed the states to make sure one state’s population couldn’t control another state through the Federal government. The State would be able to appoint people that would ensure that the states stayed powerful and the federal government wouldn’t slowing but surely make them obsolete.
So!? Why not just redact the 17th amendment? We did it to prohibition and that turned out well for us! I mean it is stupid to have two houses in congress that are elected to do the same job by the same people. It’s like having two carpenters build 2 different chairs, argue about the best design of a chair, then compromise and build a third chair and then charge you for three chairs; but you get one.
Tags: 17th amendment, 1913, blog, commentary, congress, constitution, david rivkin, democratic oppression, federal government, history, house, idiot, idiots, journalists, lee casey, military, morons, oppression, principle, senate, states rights, wall street journal
This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009 at 6:08 pm and is filed under Trackback Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.