Cantor Urges 'Open Mind' On VA Legislature Plan To Blow Up The Constitution

[chuam]

Incoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is part of a class of Republicans who say they want to change the country fundamentally -- and to that end, Cantor isn't dismissing a plan by legislators in his home state of Virgina to blow up the Constitutional system and replace it with one that would give state governments veto power over federal laws.

For several weeks now, conservative legal circles have been buzzing with Virginia House Speaker Bill Howell's plan to amend the Constitution so that a 2/3 vote of the states could overturn overturn any federal law passed by the Congress and signed by the President. Howell first floated the idea in a September Wall Street Journal op-ed he co-wrote with Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett.

"At present, the only way for states to contest a federal law or regulation is to bring a constitutional challenge in federal court or seek an amendment to the Constitution," the pair wrote. "A state repeal power provides a targeted way to reverse particular congressional acts and administrative regulations without relying on federal judges or permanently amending the text of the Constitution to correct a specific abuse."

The pair say the plan is a response to the federal overreach created by "two 'progressive' constitutional amendments adopted in 1913" -- the 16th Amendment creating a federal income tax and the 17th Amendment allowing for the direct election of U.S. Senators, which were previously appointed by state legislatures.

Undoing both those amendments has been a key tenet of tea party rhetoric for a while now.

Howell plans to kick off the repeal amendment push by bringing a bill calling for a Constitutional Convention to the floor of the Virginia legislature this January. If he can get 2/3 of the states to go along with calling for a Constitutonal Convention, then that would trigger one of the two amendment processes under Article Five of the Constitution.

This, of course, is not the standard way the Constitution has been amended in the past. Amendments usually emerge from the Congress, which must pass them by a 2/3 vote in both the House and Senate before sending them to the states to be ratified by a 3/4 vote.

In order for that to happen, of course, Howell would need allies in the Congress willing to hand over federal veto power to the states. He may have found his ally in Cantor, a fellow Virginian who is the number two man in the large Republican House majority that will be sworn in this January.

Appearing on Fox Business last week, Howell said that Cantor "was very interested" in the proposal and promised that he had "several members" of Congress who will put forward the Amendment in the House when the 112th Congress convenes in January.

Cantor's office confirmed to TPM that the incoming Majority Leader is interested in the Repeal Amendment, but said that so far Cantor is simply urging his colleagues to keep "an open mind."

"The Repeal Amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach, and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around," Cantor said in a statement. "In order to return America to opportunity, responsibility, and success, we must reverse course and the Repeal Amendment is a step in that direction."

Read Cantor's full statement on the Repeal Amendment below:


Washington has grown far too large and has become far too intrusive, reaching into nearly every aspect of our lives. In just the past few years, Washington has assumed more control over our economy and the private sector through excessive regulations and unprecedented mandates. Our liberty and freedom has lessened as the size and scope of the federal government has exploded. Massive expenditures like the stimulus, unconstitutional mandates like the takeover of health care, and intrusions into the private sector like the auto-bailouts have threatened the very core of the American free market. It's time to return America to the common sense conservative principles of limited government, free enterprise, and individual responsibility. The Repeal Amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach, and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around. In order to return America to opportunity, responsibility, and success, we must reverse course and the Repeal Amendment is a step in that direction.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...tion-video.php

[Kirk Killebrew]

At least someone is making a plan for taking the power of government (originally enumerated to the states) back to the states and closer to the people. I'm interested in learning more about this. Thanks for the informative post Chuam.

[ocean_314]

Hmmm i wonder why? Could it be that Obamacare takes all the states power away from them and make the federal government all powerful?

[Kelsea]

"The Repeal Amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach, and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around," Cantor said in a statement. "In order to return America to opportunity, responsibility, and success, we must reverse course and the Repeal Amendment is a step in that direction.

I am following this - Its a very interesting idea. I am not surprised Virginia is leading the way to find ways to regain states rights. The implications for the repeal amendment, were it to be sucessful, are substantial.

Obviously, it would have implications for Obamacare. As a future physician, I remain cautiously hopeful for something around Obamacare.

I wonder too : would the Repeal Amendment help states resist overreaching Executive Mandates? (I.E. when Bush implemented an Executive Mandate, thereby banning fed funding to certain stem cell lines created before 2001. CA found a way to still be a leader in stem cell research, by making a substantial amount of state funding available.

[Marcus]

Cool.

[Guido4198]

Thanks for the information. I was unaware of this effort...but will certainly begin to follow and encourage it..!!

[mepps1]

[rojodiablo]

Huge unintended consequences. Literally having states waging financial war against other states for retaliation. Government can and has to be reduced in cost, and scope for a strong America to thrive. Lots and lots of work to be done before anything of this scope can or will be instituted. We will have general revolt and overthrow before government will go for a program like this.


BTW, THIS is what happens when you let a Virginian sober up for a few days. Send that man a bottle of moonshine, before it's too late!!!

[Kelsea]

I wonder what the reprocussions and negative effects would be - like I said, this would really open a pandora's box if misused. And like all things - it will be misused to take advantage of somebody, somehow.

This would really open up the doors to having inter-state incongruencies/inequalities in the quality of healthcare, standards of education, interstate commerce, etc...

I see good things about the Repeal Amendment, but I smell bad things too.

[mepps1]

Originally Posted by Kelsea

I wonder what the reprocussions and negative effects would be - like I said, this would really open a pandora's box if misused. And like all things - it will be misused to take advantage of somebody, somehow.

This would really open up the doors to having inter-state incongruencies/inequalities in the quality of healthcare, standards of education, interstate commerce, etc...

I see good things about the Repeal Amendment, but I smell bad things too.

The "inequalities" from state to state would be a great thing. We would have fifty separate laboratories demonstrating what works and what doesn't in regard to healthcare, education, infrastructure, and taxes.

Do you really think the rulers from on high in DC have your best interest at heart?

[Robert D.]

love it

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by mepps1

The "inequalities" from state to state would be a great thing. We would have fifty separate laboratories demonstrating what works and what doesn't in regard to healthcare, education, infrastructure, and taxes.

That's the way it was originally intended to work but the fed gov't has since slowly spread apart the cheeks of the states and inserted it's force.