Quantcast

What the Governor of Texas Wants to Do to the Constitution Might Drive Liberals Crazy

constitutionNow that Republicans will dominate all three branches of the federal government, 33 governorships, and 32 state legislatures, will they attempt to amend the U.S. Constitution?

To amend this founding document, a two-thirds majority of the House and Senate can propose an amendment, or two-thirds of the states can call for a constitutional convention. If three-quarters of the states ratify the amendment, it becomes part of the Constitution.

Texas, which led a coalition of states challenging the soon-to-be-ex President Barack Obama’s illegal alien amnesty and “transgender” restroom schemes, appears to be leading the way to initiate changes to the Constitution. Governor Greg Abbott spoke at his state’s Capitol on Tuesday. From Dallas News:

“It is you the people who are the answer to what ails America,” Abbott told the revved up audience. “This may be our last chance to get this right.”

Abbott’s speech came as Rep. Rick Miller, R-Sugar Land and Sen. Brian Birdwell, R-Granbury, filed bills that would add Texas to a so-far short list of states calling for a constitutional amendment to restrict the powers of the federal government.

The governor began calling for a convention of the states in January, and has promised to make the issue a priority during the 2017 legislative session, which starts Jan. 10.

Gov. Abbott issued a plan for nine amendments last year, changes that would limit central government’s power.

Among the amendments Abbott suggested are requiring Congress to balance the budget, prohibiting Congress from regulating state activities and allowing a two-thirds majority of the states to override U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

President-elect Donald Trump could end up appointing more than one Supreme Court justice during his tenure. With the GOP dominating high offices in the states, Gov. Abbott’s efforts might come to fruition.

Check Also

Vice President Pence Defends Trump Administration’s Response to COVID-19

Did you miss last night’s debate between Vice President Mike Pence and Senator Kamala Harris? …

7 comments

  1. Naysayers claim that a convention would spin out of control. It could well be contentious about fine points (as was the original in the 1700’s). I doubt the former would prevail. Can you just imagine the insanity of our lib/progressive/Marxists? At worst, we might be forced to shoot some of them? Might I recommend a convention include a prohibition of Sharia law. We do not embrace religious (?) law. Let’s make it formal! Such would NOT be in violation of our standing Constitution.

    • Excellent point. There is no place in our system of government for plurality. All of our citizens are governed under a Constitution and a unified set of laws. Amendments can reflect current events and current dangers that arise from time to time which need to be adderssed via an amendment.

    • The Constitution declared itself the “supreme law of the land.” All federal agents swear to uphold it. Sharia does not agree with the “supreme law of the land” so it is already un-Constitutional. What we need is justices who will live up to their sworn oaths.

    • Sounds all good to me. Especially the Sharia Law

  2. Can we please stop saying “constitutional convention”? There can only be one of those, to establish the constitution. This has already happened. There is no provision for replacing the constitution in that document. It can. E amended by a Convention of the States, which is a different thing entirely.
    To get something out of the Convention and then have 38 States ratify is a long, safe process.

    • We have already had two Constitutional Conventions. The first Convention adopted the Constitution known as the Articles of Confederation. The second Constitutional Convention was called to amend the Articles of Confederation but the delegates chose to replace the Articles of Confederation with a new Constitution. That would be a one, an a two! When we call another it will be three.

      • It is not a Constitutional Convention.

        The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or,

        on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,

        which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three Fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

        A Constitutional convention writes a constitution,. No where in the 5th is that power given. But 2/3 of the states may call a convention to propose amendments. Hence the name “Convention of States”.