The GOP's New Constitutional Amendment: Give States Veto Power Over Federal Laws

[upstatecajun]

Republicans say they've found the problem in America -- and that problem is the basic framework of the Union as we know it today.

A group of Republicans in the House and Senate are proposing an amendment to the Constitution that would allow a vote by two-thirds of the states' legislatures to override any federal law they did not agree with.

The proposed constitutional amendment, a tea party favorite, is being touted by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) in the Senate and co-sponsored by Sens. John Barasso (R-WY) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT). In the House, Reps. Rob Bishop (R-UT), Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Paul Broun (R-GA) are leading the charge.

The goal, according to proponents, is to stop the tyranny of Washington over the economy and circumscribe other federal powers.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/the-gops-new-constitutional-amendment-give-states-veto-power-over-federal-laws.php?ref=fpa

[Drale]

1. ...........

:rofl: What is wrong with these people?

[trayfoot]

These people are IDIOTS!

[Owl]

2. Now how stupid is that?

[Massacure]

3. Wasn't this kind of what the Senate was for?

Before the Senate was elected by popular vote anyway?

[sasha031]

4. yes, and if something happens such as a hurricane, tornado or such

They will be the 1st ones screaming for funds and Federal relief.

[beyurslf]

5. Why have Congress at all? Why even a federal government.

Maybe each state should take care of itself. 50 little countries across our land.

[proud patriot]

6. why even have the United states of America then?

[Old and In the Way]

7. Legislative treason.

They swore an oath to protect and uphold the Constitution...now they are trying to kill it. Pushing laws that will destroy the United States is no different than working with our enemies to accomplish the same.

[krispos42]

8. Sure, why not?

Can you imagine 34 states all passing the same resolution to repeal a federal law?

:rofl:

[Historic NY]

9. So they want to change the intent of our Founders. Why do they hate our Constitution?

[NYC Liberal]

10. In other words, they want the Articles of Confederation.

The AoC was a disaster and the reason why the current constitution was written!

[badtoworse]

11. I have no problem with this idea

If 2/3 of the state legislatures want to override a federal law, it is most likely a bad law. It's hard to imagine that the law in question would be passed in the first place - it might pass in the Senate, maybe, but not in the House.

In any case, what is the downside?

[Wounded Bear]

20. What downside? I think your screen name kinda says it all....

:rofl:

Before the Civil War they called this "nullification."

After the Civil War, I think they called it a "bad idea."

;)

[badtoworse]

22. You didn't really respond.

If 34 states want to override a law, maybe the Feds got it wrong. In any case, approval by 34 state legislatures is a very high hurdle and I can't think of anything that seems likely to be overridden.

What laws do you believe could be vulnerable?

[Wounded Bear]

23. Sorry, but there is already ways to do this...

and it amounts to minority rule.

This tends to occur a lot in the Senate already, where one Senator can put legislation and appointments on "hold" for undisclosed reasons, usually anonymously.

The 34 states bar is already there for Constitutional issues, and rightfully so. It should be difficult to change that. But for general statutes is leads to, like the other poster said, a return to the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution is in place because that didn't work.

Those with no knowledge of history are doomed to repeat it. Those with knowledge of history that repeat it anyway are just plain stupid. (I added the second sentence. :))

[Sheepshank]

12. The idea is assinine

I can just imagine if individual states had veto rights when the Feds finally decided in 1967 that interracial marriage was not to prohibited.

[lfairban]

13. Had to say it.

Marianne Moran, executive director of the Repeal Amendment, told TPM creating a new constitutional amendment may be easier to swallow then repealing the 17th.

Get a brain, Moran!

[LetTimmySmoke]

14. Can this apply to the pot laws too?

Or did they make an exception to that to please their Prison-Industrial Complex lobbyists?

[defendandprotect]

18. Only to laws the rightwing doesn't like -- i.e., liberal laws!!

[LetTimmySmoke]

19. Of Course.

The Shrubster's DoJ proved that on numerous occasions.

[felix_numinous]

15. State veto power could work both ways,

theoretically, we could have liberal states and conservative states-right?

[arbusto_baboso]

16. So, teabaggers really ARE still fighting the Civil War.

Every day they just show how racist, regressive, stupid, vengeful and spoiled they are. The only way to deal with people like this is to set firm limits with them, harshly if necessary.

[defendandprotect]

17. Ah, but that Florida had that VETO power in 2000!!! ---!!!

[ThoughtCriminal]

21. Oh great, maybe the south could segregate schools again

I'm sure they have a lovely wish list.