PDA

View Full Version : How Tennessee Could Be About To Start A Constitutional Crisis



Ares
23rd February 2017, 05:50 AM
The State Senate of Tennessee has laid the legislative groundwork for something that hasn't been done in the United States of America since the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia. With a vote of 27-3, the Tennessee Senate has voted to call a "convention of the states" in order to draft and pass an amendment to the Constitution that would require balanced budgets to be passed every year.

For those who are little fuzzy on their high school U.S. history knowledge, the Tennessean explains that the U.S. Constitution can be amended in two ways. The first would require a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers of Congress, an unlikely outcome in today's hyper-partisan political arena. The second, on the other hand, requires that two-thirds of the states (34 in total) pass a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention.

There are two ways to propose amendments to the Constitution. The first and more traditional method is through a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Then the amendment is sent to the state legislatures, where it needs ratification by three-fourths or 38 states in order to become law. Nearly all 27 amendments have followed this path.



But the Constitution also provides a second, more populist path to amending the document. If two-thirds or 34 states pass a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention, delegates from all 50 states will meet to draft an amendment. This is what the Tennessee lawmakers are calling for in their resolution.

Of course, calls for a convention to pass a balanced budget amendment started in the 1970s and have failed each time. That said, with Republicans now controlling 32 state legislatures, this latest effort initiated by Tennessee seems to have the best chance of succeeding so far.

And while there have been close calls for Constitutional Conventions before, each time Congress has acted preemptively to stave off the need for a convention. In 1911, for example, 28 states of the required 32 passed a resolution calling for direct election of Senators before Congress intervened and drafted the Seventeenth Amendment instead.

But, as the Tennessean notes, the problem with amending the Constitution through a convention is that once the convention is convened anything can happen. For example, the last time the states gathered for a convention in 1787 they ended up tossing out the Articles of Confederation and forming an entirely new government based on the current Constitution.

The last time the states gathered to amend a governing document on the scale the resolution calls for, the delegates threw out America’s first basis of government and replaced it with the Constitutional system used today.



“They were supposed to meet to make amendments to the Articles of Confederation but ended up with a whole new form of government," said Nathan Griffith, an associate professor of political science at Belmont University. "Not just a new constitution, but a whole new form of government."

If enough states pass a similar resolution, then a planning convention could meet as early as this upcoming July, and by November the first Article V Convention in history could be called by Congress.

Meanwhile, as we noted earlier today, President Trump offered his own warning on America's national debt this morning saying that "[spending] was out of control," as officials gathered to discuss the budget, adding that there is "enormous work to do on the national debt."

There is a "moral duty" to taxpayers, President Trump says at White House budget lunch, "we must do a lot more with less."



"Our budget is absolutely out of control" he added, and in the future "will reflect our priorities."



The hiring freeze for non-essential workers will remain.



"We have enormous work to do on the national debt"



There will be "no more wasted money, we will spend in a careful way."



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8rRXorPUXU

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8rRXorPUXU

Of course, we're not really sure what all the fuss is about...only $10 trillion has been added to the national debt over the past 8 years, which, when you think about it, is a very manageable $31,000 per man, woman and child.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user230519/imageroot/2017/02/22/2017.02.22%20-%20National%20Debt_0.jpg

And balancing the budget 5 years out of 50 is pretty good, right?

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user230519/imageroot/2017/02/22/2017.02.22%20-%20Budget%20Deficit_0.jpg

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-22/how-tennessee-could-be-about-start-constitutional-crisis

Horn
23rd February 2017, 08:02 AM
Any amendment to the Constitution to balance current tax budgets, would only work to legitimize a currently Unconstitutional and Unlawful tax budget collection scheme.

If those tax collection schemes were anything like Constitutional, the state of Tennessee would not have to balance their budget as the people would do half that work for them.

palani
23rd February 2017, 08:54 AM
The State Senate of Tennessee has laid the legislative groundwork for something that hasn't been done in the United States of America since the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia.

It's not that it hasn't been attempted before.


The Hartford Convention was a series of meetings from December 15, 1814 – January 5, 1815 in Hartford, Connecticut, United States, in which the New England Federalist Party met to discuss their grievances concerning the ongoing War of 1812 and the political problems arising from the federal government's increasing power. Despite radical outcries among Federalists for New England secession and a separate peace with Great Britain, moderates outnumbered them and extreme proposals were not a major focus of the debate.[1]

The convention discussed removing the three-fifths compromise which gave slave states more power in Congress and requiring a two-thirds super majority in Congress for the admission of new states, declarations of war, and laws restricting trade. The Federalists also discussed their grievances with the Louisiana Purchase and the Embargo of 1807. However, weeks after the convention's end, news of Major General Andrew Jackson's overwhelming victory in New Orleans swept over the Northeast, discrediting and disgracing the Federalists, resulting in their elimination as a major national political force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartford_Convention

crimethink
23rd February 2017, 11:37 AM
This is nuts!

A constitutional convention is UNLIMITED in scope. Like your Bill of Rights? After a constitutional convention, you can say goodbye to most of it...or all of it.

woodman
23rd February 2017, 11:43 AM
We don't need a constitutional convention. We need to follow the constitution we already have.

crimethink
23rd February 2017, 12:13 PM
We don't need a constitutional convention. We need to follow the constitution we already have.

And further, we need to neuter the jew-dicial system that perverts the Constitution with "interpretations."

palani
23rd February 2017, 12:16 PM
After a constitutional convention, you can say goodbye to most of it...or all of it.

The bill of rights does not apply to U.S. citizens.

Your words suggest you believe you have something to lose. You don't. You got nothin' (except perhaps a mistaken belief).

midnight rambler
23rd February 2017, 12:21 PM
The bill of rights does not apply to U.S. citizens.

Your words suggest you believe you have something to lose. You don't. You got nothin' (except perhaps a mistaken belief).

The 'Constitution' is an illusory thing at this point to trick the rubes into thinking they have a duly constituted government instead of the current situation with Deep State.

palani
23rd February 2017, 12:31 PM
The 'Constitution' is an illusory thing at this point to trick the rubes into thinking they have a duly constituted government instead of the current situation with Deep State.
Actually I believe the constitution that is followed is mostly unwritten. The reason I believe this is that the constitution of a federation and the constitution of a nation are not to be mixed. Things join with like things. You do have rights under the 14th amendment constitution .... they are called DUE PROCESS.

Ever wonder why DUE PROCESS is mentioned in both the XIV amendment and the Vth amendment? Why duplicate unless it is necessary?