Are you tired of career politicians and runaway federal spending? The Convention of States movement offers a powerful solution to restore balance and accountability in our government. In this OpEd, I delve into how proposed amendments like congressional term limits, a balanced budget, and a line-item veto can curb federal overreach and empower states. Discover why these changes are crucial for a more balanced and responsible governance, and how you can get involved in making them a reality.
This OpEd ran in today’s Moscow-Pullman Daily News.
I first heard about the Convention of States (CoS) movement back in 2016. It’s a national effort to invoke Article V of the U.S. Constitution, allowing states to propose amendments.
Since the Bill of Rights, all 27 amendments have been proposed by Congress. However, Article V empowers state legislatures to convene and propose amendments without needing Congressional approval. By giving states this authority, the CoS can effectively curb federal overreach and restore a balanced distribution of power between state and federal governments.
The 10th Amendment asserts that any powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or the people. This underscores the principle of limited federal authority and reinforces states’ rights, promoting a decentralized approach to governance. This is crucial in debates over states’ autonomy on issues like education and healthcare.
While the 10th Amendment protects states from federal encroachment, the 5th Amendment protects individuals from abuses by the federal government, ensuring fairness and justice in legal processes. Both amendments are essential in maintaining the checks and balances integral to the U.S. Constitution, each addressing different aspects of limiting federal power.
One issue important to the CoS movement is congressional term limits. A proposal would limit the number of terms for individual members of Congress, like the two-term limit for the President. Over 80% of Americans favor term limits, but of course Congress consistently quashes the idea. Why wouldn’t they? So instead of dealing with congressmen peddling their influence to ingratiate themselves, term limits would do away with career politicians who spend vast amounts of time securing funds for their districts and approval for endless reelection, and instead encourage focus and fresh perspectives in Congress.
Term limits could apply across the branches of government to include the Supreme Court as well. Lack of sensible term limits led to Ruth Bader Ginsburg conferring on Supreme Court cases from her death bed at the end of her long life — a pattern we would do well to not repeat as we cannot afford any more octogenarians leading this country.
Another proposed CoS amendment is for a line-item veto, which allows a president to reject specific parts of a bill without vetoing the entire bill. This challenges Congress, which often relies on horse-trading to include their pork in bills.
In 1996, President Bill Clinton was granted the power of the line-item veto with the enactment of the Line-Item Veto Act. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in 1998 that the line-item veto was unconstitutional, undoing Clinton’s act.
Another CoS proposal is a balanced budget amendment. We’re currently $35 trillion in debt, adding an additional $1 trillion of debt every 100 days. As Ronald Reagan famously said, we don’t have a taxation problem but a spending problem. A balanced budget amendment would require the federal government to balance its budget annually, preventing deficit spending except in times of national emergency. I have concerns about the exception clause. These days, just about everything is labeled a national emergency, leading us to spend ourselves into oblivion.
What if we didn’t have an exemption? Maybe then we’d think twice before diving into foreign wars that aren’t our business and actually prioritize spending on issues at home that matter to American citizens.
An adjacent CoS proposal is to limit federal taxation. This includes placing an upper limit on federal taxes and requiring a super-majority vote in Congress to approve any new taxes or increase existing ones.
I would love to see a 10% flat-tax at the federal level. If a 10% tithe is good enough for God, it should be more than good enough for the feds. Yes, this means taxation would shift to the states, counties, and cities. But we can better control our spending locally than from far away in D.C.
By empowering states to propose these changes, we can curb federal overreach and restore balance. Imagine the impact of limiting career politicians, requiring fiscal responsibility, and reducing pork-barrel spending in an overall revival of well-distributed management. These amendments echo the 10th Amendment’s call for limited federal power and the 5th Amendment’s protection against federal abuses.
The CoS offers a path to a more balanced, accountable government that directly addresses the concerns of American citizens. A 10% flat tax at the federal level, as I propose, would shift the power back to the states, enhancing local control over spending and ensuring that our tax dollars are used well.
If you’re interested in learning more about the CoS movement, visit www.conventionofstates.com. There, you can get involved and find answers to both common questions, and common misconceptions.