In2 the Perry Seven Points of the Apocalypse…

So I see the internet has hummed a little regards Perrys views on some things it is assumed he’d actively change in the US Constitution.Lets look at this.

1. Abolish lifetime tenure for federal judges by amending Article III, Section I of the Constitution.

Well I for one don’t disagree with this. In fact I fully support it. The easiest way to curtail activist judges yet allow jurists to attempt to be true to the office is to limit their time. Popular election isn’t a good way to establish a fair bench. Leaving people on the bench without a check is equally negative.

2. Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions with a two-thirds vote.

This one is off base but I view those that support it do so due to the expediency of it all and the knee jerk reactionary aspect of it. No what you need to do is seat a Congress that passes laws that pass Constitutional muster. Overriding the Supremes is not a solution to a problem,in fact it is part and parcel to the problem that is the root of some of the more screwy Fed judiciary rulings.

3. Scrap the federal income tax by repealing the Sixteenth Amendment.

I don’t support this one but it does ring true in some populist circles. As far as executive proposals go this one is silly but not treasonous or so alien that Perry and others are to be feared.

4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.

I actually support this one. I believe the “popularly elected” Senate has done nothing but sully its purpose. It is now a perverse clone of the House with some extras. It is no less the Billionaires Boys Club kind of thing than progressives wished to slay. Corruption? Lets face it ,it just shifted the venue of corruption from the closed doors of the governors mansions to the ward boss and $$$ dogs trading room. My biggest beef is the castrating effect it has had on the Senates credibility,I’d also like to see a return to the States their relevancy in dealing with the Federal government.

5. Require the federal government to balance its budget every year.

Yeah that one is pure insanity man. Too funny. Listen everyone bitching about the economy regardless of the party should be behind this one.
As for #’s 6& 7 gay marriage and abortion.Perry has also been on record as stating the marriage issue is a states rights thing. He was pretty well publicized how he played that when NY passed their law. Whether he wants to get going on the 14th and 10th would be open for discussion. As for abortion much the same.

 

Advertisements

9 Comments

  1. bvilleyellowdog says:

    Perry/Bachmann in 2012!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA

  2. Rutherford says:

    Alfie, I’m puzzled about the Senator thing. I’ll just chalk this up to ignorance but how would we choose Senators if not by election? Would they be appointed by Governors, or selected by party organizations within each state? And if so, how does this not carry the same potential for corruption as the current approach?

  3. Rutherford says:

    To be clear, the ignorance I was referencing was my own.

  4. R,

    The point of the Senate was to provide the states representation in the Federal government. As such, it should be up to the state legislatures to determine who should represent the state in the Senate.

  5. Alfie says:

    I personally believe they should be chosen by the Governors. I feel this way for a few reasons.
    I live in a state where the gov is elected in off POTUS years. I need something that makes the gov race more worthy of people hitting the polls.
    I want governors and state government to heighten their accountability to the citizenry.
    And the biggie is I want the states to exert some real pressure on its Senators.

  6. Alfie, the idea was for indirect election of Senators. Electing a governor puts too much power in one set of hands. When they are choosen by the legislature, you are diffusing the power to select, but it gives more accountablilty. When the people voting on federal legislation are directly chosen by the legislature, I guarantee you will see a reduction in unfunded mandates to the states. You will also see an abrubpt end to the usurpation of state power and the expansion of the federal government.

    And if you didn’t. Then we deserve to be completely boned.

  7. Rutherford says:

    Ok, this exchange better helps me understand the alternatives but it brings me back to my other question. Why would things be any better? The state legislature would send to the Senate the person who would get them the most pork, big government be damned. No?

  8. an800lbgorilla says:

    But then the Senators would be working in the interest of the States rather than their parties. Yeah, you’d see some reflection of party dynamics, but class-warfare rhetoric, etc, would carry no weight since it was legislatures- who see through that kind of bullshit- who do the voting.

    Yeah, you’ll have pork, but more importantly, you’ll have a serious effort made to contain and constrain the federal government to its COnstitutional responsibilities.

  9. Alfie says:

    R all I can say is apply it to all 50 states and think about what could happen.

Comments are closed.