TX Governor Abbot calls for Constitutional Convention and Suggests 9 New Amendments

[HoneyBadger]

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/01/gov-greg-abbott-calls-for-constitutional-convention-to-take-back-states-rights.html/



Gov. Greg Abbott, aiming to spark a national conversation about states’ rights, said Friday that he wants Texas to lead the call for a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution and wrest power from a federal government “run amok.”

“If we are going to fight for, protect and hand on to the next generation, the freedom that [President] Reagan spoke of … then we have to take the lead to restore the rule of law in America,” Abbott said during a speech at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Policy Orientation that drew raucous applause from the conservative audience.

Along with the speech, Abbott released a nearly 70-page plan – part American civics lesson, part anti-Obama diatribe – detailing nine proposed constitutional amendments that he said would unravel the federal government’s decades-long power grab and restore authority over economic regulation and other matters to the states.

“The irony for our generation is that the threat to our Republic doesn’t come just from foreign enemies, it comes, in part, from our very own leaders,” Abbott said in a speech that took aim at President Obama, Congress and the judicial branch. All three, he said, have “run amok.”

The proposal for a constitutional convention, which has been gaining traction among some (http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/04/doing-the-math-for-a-new-constitutional-convention/) among conservative Republicans, comes just as the GOP presidential candidates begin to make forays into Texas ahead of the March primary election. The state, with 155 delegates up for grabs, will certainly be a key player in the party’s nominating process.

[sniper7]

I can only hope to see Obama impeached for overstepping everything.

[ray1970]

Almost makes me miss living in Texas. Almost.

[WETWRKS]

You open that door and it will be open for the liberals to change or remove the 2nd amendment completely.

considering the Feds are outright ignoring the constitution completely this will not stop them and will only open things for them to strip us of what little protection we have.

[HoneyBadger]

You open that door and it will be open for the liberals to change or remove the 2nd amendment completely.

considering the Feds are outright ignoring the constitution completely this will not stop them and will only open things for them to strip us of what little protection we have.
I acknowledge this argument, but I simply don't believe that it would happen. You think 120+ million gun owners would just line up to turn in their weapons before getting on the proverbial train cars? I don't. If just .1% of them decided not to comply, it would be an outright civil war. Nobody wants that.

[68Charger]

But to WETWRKS's point, many of these amendments could be abused by the left as well... what the constitution needs is teeth- punishments for deliberately passing unconstitutional laws. Severe punishments.

And MUCH more specific limitations on growth of Federal Gov't. Make it damn clear that the states rights trump all but national security. Leave it to each state if they want to become commiefornia or libertarian, etc...

[Hound]

Actually think those 9 changes are not too far off. The devil is in the details though. Odds of actually getting a convention................

[Zundfolge]

You open that door and it will be open for the liberals to change or remove the 2nd amendment completely.

No, just No ... No it won't ... for the thousandth time, an Article V Convention Of The States To Propose Amendments To The Constitution is SPECIFICALLY LIMITED. Its not a full "Constitutional Convention" like what happened in 1787.

It has written in it, before it begins, the whole notion that "we will propose X constitutional amendments AND ONLY X AMENDMENTS"

[WETWRKS]

I don't trust that our current politicians are smarter than our founding fathers...the founding fathers put the amendments in place to protect us from people like we are facing now. They made the amendments deliberately difficult to change to keep politicians like we have now from stripping us of those rights...and we are considering handing them the key to take it all from us.

[WETWRKS]

No, just No ... No it won't ... for the thousandth time, an Article V Convention Of The States To Propose Amendments To The Constitution is SPECIFICALLY LIMITED. Its not a full "Constitutional Convention" like what happened in 1787.

It has written in it, before it begins, the whole notion that "we will propose X constitutional amendments AND ONLY X AMENDMENTS"

And you think the liberals won't propose their own changes? You think they won't demand a say?

[Zundfolge]

And you think the liberals won't propose their own changes? You think they won't demand a say?

The amendments are written BEFORE the convention. They just convene to tweak them and vote on them. I don't think they can tweak the amendments enough to make them bad things (and certainly not do something silly like damage the 1A or 2A). Worst thing they'll be able to do is vote them down.

[HoneyBadger]

But to WETWRKS's point, many of these amendments could be abused by the left as well... what the constitution needs is teeth- punishments for deliberately passing unconstitutional laws. Severe punishments.

And MUCH more specific limitations on growth of Federal Gov't. Make it damn clear that the states rights trump all but national security. Leave it to each state if they want to become commiefornia or libertarian, etc...
Very good points.

[Wulf202]

I always thought "shall not be infringed" was pretty damned clear.

[HoneyBadger]

I always thought "shall not be infringed" was pretty damned clear.
I don't think anyone here is in disagreement... and yet we still have to fight every day with people who have control over such things.

[Gman]

If I remember correctly, the advantage of a Constitutional Convention is that it isn't done by the 'electoral college' like our elections. The wads of libs in limited metropolitan areas can't dictate the agenda to the rest of the country.

[DavieD55]

I don't trust that our current politicians are smarter than our founding fathers...the founding fathers put the amendments in place to protect us from people like we are facing now. They made the amendments deliberately difficult to change to keep politicians like we have now from stripping us of those rights...and we are considering handing them the key to take it all from us.


I believe wholeheartdly that if there was a Constitution convention, we would be worse off afterward. Do you not remember that over 50% of the idiots voted for obama? twice? and will gladly vote in criminal hilary? if there was a convention we would be fucked. and Americans are too civilized for a revolution. (well not all people living in America, but people like us)

This and this.

[Irving]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Amendments to the Constitution simply specified restrictions on what the government cannot do? I can't think of too many government restrictions that would worsen the country.

That said, I imagine that the fear of a Constitution convention is that people would remove Amendments.

Edit: After reading the article and the proposed amendments, I'm not sure I like all of them.

[Skip]

I always thought "shall not be infringed" was pretty damned clear.

If you've been paying attention the last seven or so years, you've probably come to understand words are just words (I think our King even said that, didn't he?). It's who holds power that matters. Who "won" the majority of votes to use gov as a weapon against those who lost.

The Republic is dead. The laws are selectively interpreted and enforced. Liberals have even destroyed democracy (e.g. gay marriage).

We don't need new Amendments or a new Constitution. We need the moral and physical courage to enforce the one we have. And that can be done without firing a shot. Until we have that, this is all just mental masturbation.

[Ridge]

I agree with most of Abbot's proposals, except for the ones that allow them to ignore the Supreme Court.

[hollohas]

Mark Levin has a great book called the Liberty Amendments in which he details a set of proposed Amendments that he believes would help restore liberty. It includes tons of history and reasoning. Great read.

[Ronin13]

I acknowledge this argument, but I simply don't believe that it would happen. You think 120+ million gun owners would just line up to turn in their weapons before getting on the proverbial train cars? I don't. If just .1% of them decided not to comply, it would be an outright civil war. Nobody wants that.

It only took 3% of the population to successfully revolt against the British... Just saying. [Beer]

[Scanker19]

http://youtu.be/-c9mlOrDhc4