New Constitutional Amendment proposed - Repeal Amendment
xmacro
Posts: 3,402 ✭
Anyone heard of this? Seems it's an amendment that would allow 2/3 of the States to repeal Federal laws. Here's a little opinion piece from today's Wall Street Journal:
Notable & Quotable
Law Prof. Randy Barnett, writing Monday in the Washington Examiner, on Rep. Rob Bishop's recent introduction of the "Repeal Amendment."
Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, has introduced into Congress a very simple and clear amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Called the Repeal Amendment, it reads:
"Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed."
In short, the legislatures of two-thirds of the states can repeal any federal law or regulation. . . . The Repeal Amendment seems to have touched a nerve on the left.
First, the Washington Post's Dana Milbank played the race card. "[T]here's the unfortunate echo of nullificationthe right asserted by states to ignore federal laws they found objectionableand the 'states' rights' argument that was used to justify slavery and segregation."
But this is imaginary. Undermining civil rights is simply not on the agenda of anyone who favors this. Besides, to reach the two-thirds threshold to repeal any law would require the support of lots of blue states as well as red states, from different parts of the country. . . .
The only objection of substance concerns the theoretical possibility that two-thirds of the least populous states, representing less than half of the nation's population, could stymie legislation backed by a majority.
Although our Constitution is as much about protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority as it is about majoritarian rule, this scenario is highly unlikely. . . .
Realistically, repeal will only happen when the 535 persons comprising Congress plus the president are grossly out of step with public opinion, or when Congress has messed with the internal operation of state governments in ways that are out of public view.
Besides, the proposal has a built-in safety valve: Congress can re-enact anything the states manage to repeal.
So the strongest objection to the Repeal Amendment is that it is too modest to check runaway federal power. But, like the president's veto power, the threat of repeal would deter Congress from interfering with states.
0
Comments
Making this nearly useless and unnecessary legislation just being used to make the uninformed feel like they are have more decretralized power and that the govt. has less of a role in our lives...no?
Either way, I see the amendment as a good thing - for one, there's no way ObamaCare as it passed in March, with the polling numbers unchanged after 6 months, could have passed again in August or September - how rotten does legislation have to be, that the Congress has to ram it through on a 51-vote majority? Shouldn't something that reorganizes 1/5 of the American economy have to pass by a higher margin? Such an Amendment may not have stopped the healthcare bill, but it certainly would've made Congress think twice about ramming it through, and would likely have forced them to compromise on parts of it.
As far as razor thin margins, while I dont disagree I would like to see a consenus---not just 51 votes---thats the way things work and have worked. The tide is toward the right at this point in our national politics, so alot of things will be put forth to "ride the wave" if you will. As far as healthcare the left is ok with it now...but would be just as unhappy if a similarly important piece of legistlation passed for the repubs with the same narrow margin. Close endings are only bitter when your side loses...same goes for both sides of our political spectrum. Im all for states rights and a better way to run govt....but an amendment with no real power, only a perception, doesnt seem like the best way of fixing out problems. How about real amendments to fix the real issues?? Dems included in this as well.
I'll admit this amendment doesn't have much teeth - it's only real ability is to overturn Congress if they pass something on a razor-thin majority that the public overwhelmingly hates - the only way something can ever get to that stage is if a single party has massive majorities in both houses of Congress, and the healthcare bill is the only recent law that fits that order. But even given that, I still think it's an interesting concept to allow the States the ability to prevent Congressional legislation that's hugely unpopular.
Otherwise I agree with you that things change depending on who's winning; like the filibuster - the majority always threatens to repeal it, while the minority always screams that it's vital to preserving their rights - both Repubs and Dems want to repeal it when they're in power, and scream when they're out. I'm rather interested how the pundits would react if Nancy Pelosi put forward this kinda bill - would the same people support it, or the same ones oppose it?