The Convention of States Project is calling for an Article V convention of states meeting to discuss possible Constitutional amendments to limit the size, scope and jurisdiction of the federal government, discuss term limits for federal officials and restore fiscal restraints.
This aligns with supermajority public opinion that DC does too much, spends too much and stays too long. For decades, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, liberals and conservatives have held this view. Public opinion also agrees that DC will do nothing to correct these problems.
The Framers knew this and that is why they provided We The People, working through our state legislators, the ability to propose amendments to check the power of the federal government.
Some may say the scope of our resolution is too broad. Some say single subject proposals are the way to go. I will address these issues one by one and explain the historical and pragmatic fallacies with this position. There is not a single “magic bullet.” The Article V convention of states process provides the best constitutional and peaceful way to bring accountability back to the federal government. We will only be successful if self-citizens like you and I work to make it reality.
The first subject in the COSP’s Article V resolution is limiting the size, scope and jurisdiction of the federal government. What does this mean?
The federal government is involved in several areas that are outside of their powers enumerated in the Constitution. Some of these areas are education, school curriculum, healthcare decisions, determining what kinds of light bulbs are in your home, compensation of a private company’s employees, defining what constitutes marriage, motor vehicle fuel economy and so on.
This is accomplished through a myriad of government agencies created through Congressional action. These bureaucracies are largely unaccountable to We The People. They create rules outside of the Constitutional legislative process. Some of these rules carry criminal penalties. The Federal Register is over 75,000 pages long. It is guaranteed that each of us unknowingly violates some bureaucratic rule every day.
They have taken these powers largely through court cases, under the auspices of the General Welfare Clause. The original intent of the General Welfare Clause is whatever the individual states were unable to manage on their own, the federal government could step in. The brief list of activities above shows the federal government has breached this protection.
The first subject in the COSP’s resolution addresses the federal government’s overreach by its constitutional branches and the bureaucracy. Proposals can and should be proposed to restate The Framers’ original intent of the General Welfare and Commerce Clauses. A proposal could be made to allow a supermajority of state legislatures to override Supreme Court cases which violate the Constitution. There could be proposals where a supermajority of state legislatures could override or must approve certain federal regulations. States can discuss proposals to push back against a myriad of unfunded federal mandates.
The point of this subject area is to limit the number of decisions the federal government makes and force them to operate within their enumerated powers. The Constitutional authority for these decisions lies at the state and local levels. State legislators can exercise their oversight of the federal government if they have the courage to do so.
The second subject of our resolution is to discuss term limits for federal officials.
The Framers believed in citizen legislators serving in Congress. They never envisioned having career politicians. The main reason was that the real action and decisions should be made at the state and local government level. George Washington had no desire to be President, but he was encouraged to run by his fellow citizens. He could have served as President for the remainder of his life. Instead, he chose to step aside after two 4-year terms. Setting the precedent for presidential term limits until FDR and the subsequent 22nd Amendment.
Congress is happy to impose term limits on other members of the federal government. They are not too keen to seriously discuss imposing them on themselves. State legislators can propose some type of term limitation through an Article V meeting called under our resolution.
Proposals could be discussed to limit the terms of members of Congress, Supreme and other federal court judges and other government officials. A hard and fast limitation on time served in the same capacity could be proposed. Commissioners could also propose Jefferson’s principle of rotation in office.
For instance, perhaps members of Congress could be limited to 12 years of service in either chamber. If they wanted to run again, they would have to sit out an election cycle. If their constituents wanted to re-elect them, they could for another 12 year segment. This would break the power of incumbency without disenfranchising voters. It may also change a Congressperson’s thought process as they would have to live by the legislation they passed at least for a time.
If we want term limits discussed and have a realistic chance of implementing them, the path is through the convention of states process.
Next week, we will cover the final subject of our resolution, restoring fiscal restraints. We will also discuss why single-subject resolutions are ineffective and can be counterproductive.
In liberty,
Brett
Brett
Help with confirming your email address here
Sign up for our free COS University courses here
Past Blog Posts
Did you miss last week's blog post? No worries, we've got you covered!
Click here to access our archive and see the full history of the blog.
