Home We the People Federalism Article V of the Constitution, Should Texas lead the way to prune the Fed?

Article V of the Constitution, Should Texas lead the way to prune the Fed?

This topic contains 16 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by  David Winterton 9 years, 3 months ago.

  • Article V of the Constitution, Should Texas lead the way to prune the Fed?

    Started by Eric Valentine

    Secession or Amendments, either is good by me. As long as the Feds are clipped off at the knees we are better off.

    According to Article V, Congress must call for an amendment-proposing convention, “on the application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States”, and therefore 34 state legislatures would have to submit applications. Once an Article V Convention has proposed amendments, then each of those amendments would have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states (i.e. 38 states) in order to become part of the Constitution.

    Thoughts?

    16
    Replies

    All for it….Washington is corrupt, They no longer represent the people or even the country for that matter. The problem is the guys currently at the state level probably have hopes of a Washington post someday and wouldn’t go along with anything that would hinder their glory! If we don’t secede, a revolution is the only way we will ever get this country back.

    What specific constitutional amendments do you believe would be necessary to reduce the influence of the federal government, and restore the principle of state sovereignty guaranteed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments?

    Mike Goldman
    Policy Analyst, Texans for Greg Abbott

    Watching our legislators in Washington do the Rope-A-Dope, slitting each other’s throats and back stabbing is exactly what has gone on for years. I know several people who were elected to office only to become corrupted by that office. On the other hand, there are also just as many not affected adversly by their position of representation and power. I knew Ben Nelson as Governor of the state of Nebraska, as well as Mike Johans. I went to church witht Chuck Hagel and his family, and went to school with Tom Coburn and Mike Synar. I was an aquaintance of State Senator Scott Price, and US Representative Lee Terry. As recently as last week, when our own Senator Cornyn voted with the Democrats in the Senate to strip the defunding language from the buget bill, it showed that he does NOT listen to his constituents, to his financers. In a recent townhall with Rep Mac Thornberry(R) (Tx-13)I found how shallow his statements and support of constituents views really was. I am personally tired of the double-talk mumbo jumbo put out by those who represent us in Washington. Federal over-reach has become the norm, and unless WE THE PEOPLE of Texas take matters more direcdtly in hand, we can only expect growning shadow of Federal interference in our daily lives. Texas was once a great Republic, and much of my family moved here during Statehood and beyond. One Great-grandfather of my Grandmother fought in Ochiltree’s Army, another rode in DeBrays 26th Calvalry. At the moment the Constitution does not mean anything to the POATUS, or the Supreme Court, so we must find Federalist to promote our cause and support our actions to decrease Washington’s death grip on out economy, our people, our institutions and our livelyhood. But I see no hope, except to proceed on our own. Article1 Section 1 of the Texas Constitution reads:

    Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.
    Article 1 Section 2 goes on to enumerate:

    All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.

    Our own State representatives all too often forget they swear an oath to uphold this document and should be made to read it often so they fully understand its meaning and importance. We as Texans need to ensure our freedom, whether by independence or action to reduce Federal influence outside the Constitutional boundaries mentioned above.

    Mr. Riddle, you make a good point about federal overreach. How do you think we have arrived at this point?

    As for the Article V. Convention, that is a very hard thing to control! While the current U.S. Constitution does limit it to Amendments only, Amendments have been “added” in the past that restricted American freedoms and could again. Remember the Prohibition thing?
    Further, who will be the delegates to this convention? The delegates will be chosen by the State legislatures! In other words, the same RINOs and Democrat liberals that got us in this mess!
    I’m not saying it doesn’t merit consideration, but should be looked at with a very wary eye.
    The better solution by far is to put Texas Independence on the ballot in 2014. Do not let anyone tell you it can’t be done! It has been done by 143 countries around the world since the end of WWII and Scotland and Catalonia vote for Independence in 2014 as well. The U.N. and the U.S. have recognized each and every one of those countries immediately after the people voted! And EVERY one of those countries is better off today, with a more satisfied and happier populace, without exception!
    Texas has an economy roughly equal to that of Australia and New Zealand combined and would be energy self-sufficient immediately on Independence!
    http://www.texnat.org

    After having read Mark Levin’s book pertaining to the article V strategy to propose amendments , I think it is pretty clear that the high bar of 3/4 of the states being needed to adopt an amendment leaves us with little to fear, much to gain. What is clear is the federal system is broken. We have no federalism in any meaningful way, the states are increasingly subject to whim of federal authority and have no reasonable means to limit or direct the policies coming from DC. The senate routinely works at direct odds to their intended function, no state can count on senate representation to protect the interests of the state. I do think, ultimately, the repeal of the seventeenth amendment is a powerful tool in the reassertion of state power and should be pursued with all haste.

    At this point we have created a police state out of the US, the federal government does entirely as it wishes and the SCOTUS is no longer an effective means to insure the rule of law. Without the state governments to reign in the federal government, the central government has accrued ever greater power and funding while failing to recognize the autonomous functions of state and local authorities. The “risk” of pursuing this strategy is only that it will fall short, not that it will lead to greater reduction in state power. What state government is going to vote to divest itself of more power?

    There are several amendments that will help the states to reign in the fed.

    Term limits. House of Reps limited to 2, 2 year terms. Congress was never supposed to be a career, Representatives were meant to serve a couple of months a year then return to their permanent jobs. Thus being close to their constituents.

    Abolish the 17th amendment. Revert Senators back to being appointed by the States and not popular election, and can serve no longer than 6 years. The senate was meant to be the states voice in the federal government. The house of reps is the peoples voice.

    Abolish the 16th amendment. Federal Reserve and the income tax. This is the corner stone of an overreaching government. Once they were allowed to steal from our paychecks they gained immense power.

    Abolish the current Congressional pay scheme. Their pay, benefits and retirement are the sole responsibility of the state that appointed them. Congress is so out of touch with the people now, and are getting rich from their positions, while getting a golden retirement and health benefits. By making their compensation the purview of the state they reside, it takes away Congress’ ability to write their own checks with our money.

    Create flat tax and balanced budget amendment. The flat tax cannot exceed 18% of the previous years GDP. Congress can, by ¾ vote, increase tax rate by as much as 5% for 3 months at a time. Congress can, by ¾ vote during times of state of emergency or declaration of war, borrow money for the purpose of funding war, or assisting the state of emergency, but that loan must be repaid in 2 years from date of loan.

    you forgot one major thing,not one person in america owns the property they bought,they are leasing it and the govt can take it away,,you forgot the war powers act of 1933 which gave every ounce of our country to international bankers which control the federal reserve which prints fiat currency or as the early colonists would call it colonial script this cause the revolution….see we the people of america needs to revolt again and take our country back..if texas suceded from the union 35 other states would follow suit and more would follow leaving washington a ghost town,,,,also we need a govenor who would insure our national guard is protected by texas and answer more to texas then the central goverment..i am praying you will be a governot like rick perry is a man who packs a gun and has backbone..

    Mr. Frank,

    Wouldn’t abolishing the 16th amendment obviate the need for a flat tax (i.e., a flat-rate income tax)?

    Assuming the abolition of the 16th amendment, how would the federal government derive its income? If the federal government were to be downsized, what programs would be eliminated?

    On term limits, James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 53:

    “[A] few of the members of Congress will possess superior talents; will by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members of Congress, and the less the information of the bulk of the members, the more apt they be to fall into the snares that may be laid before them.”

    As an example of this concept, six of the most important political figures in the first 50 years of our country; James Madison, Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams, John Calhoun and Stephen A. Douglas, served a combined 140 years in Congress. In this light, would the gains of Congressional term limits be worth the costs?

    Mike Goldman
    Policy Analyst, Texans for Greg Abbott

    Some great comments. First as to the Article V Convention. I run a group on Facebook called ‘Americans United Against Tyranny’ and we have a member named Dan Marks who is a Constitutional Scholar and who has submitted a paper to both the Senate and House that lays out the arguments for why the conditions of Article V have already been satisfied. That paper was developed by Mr. Marks and one Bill Walker who is one of the Founders of ‘Friends of the Article V Convention’ (FOAVC.org) That document was subsequently researched by the Senate Parliamentarian, Elizabeth McDonnough and entered into the Senate Record, which means that she has, on her own research, validated the arguments of Mr. Marks paper. What this means is that the Senate (The House has received the same paper and I believe it has likewise been entered into the Record) has now moved the matter to the Judiciary Committee and is now under obligation per force of the Constitution to issue the Call To Convention.

    Mr. Walker argues that, contrary to some beliefs, that the Delegates will need to be elected by regular election process in all the Districts of the States. And as someone pointed out, the need for Ratification by 38 of the 50 States eliminates any serious risk to the Liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. 26 State Legislatures are currently controlled by Conservatives, 19 by Democrats, and the rest are split. The election of Delegates argument is supported by the idea of representation of the People as the Delegate elections would be won by campaigning for issues that the Delegate would seek to argue at Convention. But since there has never been an AVC the question is sure to be debated heavily.

    And that segues into the larger point of discussion, from my perspective. The American People are so culturally and politically divided that it is unlikely that sufficient consensus could be found to see any Amendment through to Ratification. I believe that the Convention will never be called by Congress despite the Constitutional Mandate because there is not sufficient political will to compel Congress to do so. And it’s not like Congress isn’t ignoring the Constitution on many fronts already.

    But to the main reason for my posting. The Federal Government is out of control and has become tyrannical. We, The People, must take our country back. We must unite and fight with one voice. There is power in unity.. E Pluribus Unum! And we can unite around one simple common idea… that idea is ‘America’. The Founders did not intend for us to have this Big Brother centralized power Government. They intended for us to be a Republic of Free States. And we let this monster form because it promised us Security and Prosperity. We were naive, believing that there would always be justice and right guiding the Government because of our Constitution. But power aggregated is power corrupted and our FedGov now threatens every one of us with tyranny. And we must unite and put an end to it. No leader will save us… no Party will save us… only we, the United American People, can save us and our children and the future. I am part of a movement that has a working plan and now has many people engaged to do just that. We are seeing a revolution begin in America and what is needed is for all those who understand the need to unite and who are ready to invest their time and energy, no matter how much, big or small, to bring the message of ‘American Unity’ to their friends, their neighbors, their leaders in their cities and towns, and bring the Patriots of this nation together.

    We are building a website now that will provide a facility for Patriots to unite with others in their communities to fight for common causes. We will provide news and information services that facilitate those efforts and give patriots tools to fight with. And through binding all these groups and efforts and individuals together we will build a network of American heroes to take this country back and to declare with a clear voice.. a united voice… that the ideologies that are destroying this country are not American. We can demand changes in our National leadership… reform in our Education systems… reform in our courts and our media and everywhere that we see the poison of corruption and deceit destroying America. But we must unite and we must do it now. Time is running out. There is power in unity and we must make it ours.

    Mr. Goldman

    The main reason to abolish 16A is because it gives congress the power to tax income as they see fit. We need to remove that power from them. Thus a flat tax and balanced budget amendment would replace the 16A. Along with that we need to abolish the Fed Reserve and make Congress do their job.

    You know, I generally agree with the founders way of thinking, but term limits is one area where I differ. While your right that by instituting term limits we might push out that 1 in a million perfect politician, I feel that the benefit far outweighs that possibility.

    If we could force Congress back to the way it was during the baby years of this country then yes by all means no term limits. But Congress is so far from what it used to be. Originally it was a part time position only held a couple of months a year, the rest of the time congressmen were back home working in their districts staying in touch with the people. Now it’s a full time cash cow job, completely removed from the people they claim to serve, when in fact they serve only themselves. Originally, the majority of politicians were about god and country, now its all power and money. Too many politicians are voted in because they have a recognizable name or have a D or R after their name. Very few are elected for the content of their character, or their accomplishments, which is why we are in the mess we are in.

    Would the proposal be to fund the federal government by a national sales tax or some other mechanism; simply to transfer most federal functions back to the states (or abolish them where appropriate), or some combination of these ideas?

    Would this new approaching to funding the federal government still ensure that benefits of a strong federal government – including a first-class military and an unparalleled international diplomatic presence – remain intact?

    I’m thinking y’all are not thinking. A ConCon will gather 535 delegates many of whom (depending on exactly when it convenes) or most of whom would be progressives. My view is the US Constitution is a truly amazing document as it stands. Only those who think they know better than all of society and know how to help me, think the US Constitution is outdated. Those would include Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Obama’s handlers and Justice Ginsburg among others. Recall, Justice Ginsburg recommended to Arab Spring Egypt that the US Constitution is a bad model — that the South African constitution is more modern and would be better for Egyptians. [I am a student of PH] Arrogance and elitism is greed for power. Greed, as y’all know can be expressed in at least two way: money, power. Progressives are greedy.

    Regardless of how many delegates are gathered… in the end… each state has ONLY one vote.

Be sure to read the Forum Rules.