Voters Must Take Matters Into Their Own Hands

Theres more han one way to strip D.C. of power. By Tara Ross This years political campaigns are headed into the homestretch.  November looms less than two months away.  Much of America is sick and tired of the big spending big government ways of politicians on both sides of the aisle.  Whether the mood is anti-Democrat or anti-incumbent voters seem determined to change course.  But there may be more than one way to strip D.C. of its power to spend too much of taxpayers money.   Elections are obviously the first and best way for citizens to make a statement. But a proposal from a bipartisan group of congressmen was nearly lost in the shuffle earlier this summer. Their plan is the latest iteration of a rather simple idea that has surfaced before: States should have equal power along with Congress to propose a single amendment to the U.S. Constitution. States can urge constitutional change today of course but their power is too broad for most purposes. Article V of the Constitution allows states to petition Congress for a convention for proposing amendments." No specific method is provided for a state to propose a single amendment to the Constitution despite the fact that Congress may always do so. The omission has proven to be an important one. The states have never used their Article V power to petition Congress for a convention. Thats not to say that state legislators have never wanted change.  But their potential ability to petition Congress for an entire constitutional convention (when they really wanted only one or two specific amendments!) is a little bit like using a sledgehammer to take out a gnat. The power is too big and too overwhelming; it could easily spin out of control. Supporters of change often abandon the idea of using the provision because they fear that their desire to implement one specific idea will result in a runaway convention" that will seek all sorts of radical change to our generally successful federal Constitution. Enter at this point the Madison Amendment. It gives states a power that Congress already has:

• The ability to propose one and only one! specific amendment to the Constitution.

If two-thirds of states propose an identical amendment then Congress would be required to call a limited-purpose convention for consideration of that single amendment. Just imagine what voters and state legislators could do to restrain the federal government with such a tool in their hands. Advocates of the Madison Amendment point out that one probable outcome of the amendment would be the end of unfunded state mandates. State legislators would suddenly have the power to defend themselves against those congressmen who promise voters anything (and everything!) without worrying about how their counterparts in the state legislatures will pay for it. State legislators would no longer need Congress to control itself. They could simply ban such irresponsible mandates unless accompanied by congressional funding. Potentially two other broadly supported constitutional amendments would stand a better chance of success with the Madison Amendment in place despite the reluctance of congressmen to restrict themselves:

1. Term Limits and
2. Balanced Budget Amendments.

Both amendments would put a severe crimp in the freewheeling wasteful ways of Washington. The difficulty of course is in getting the Madison Amendment implemented in the first place. Advocates argue that we are at a unique moment in history where this amendment might be possible but it may also be a now or never" proposition. It is no secret that the electorate is fiercely discontent with big government incumbents. This desire for change is likely to result in larger than normal delegations of fiscally conservative legislators after November. These new legislators should be called upon to support the Madison Amendment. The support of 34 states will be needed. (This is the same number of states that would be needed if the states were to decide to utilize their Article V power to call a constitutional convention.) First these state legislatures need to pass resolutions urging Congress to propose the Madison Amendment to the states for ratification. The legislatures could threaten to utilize their already existing constitutional power to call a full-fledged convention if Congress does not comply. This very well might work. No one really wants to risk a runaway convention not even federal legislators. Hopefully the political pressure combined with a more conservative Congress would be sufficient to get the proposed amendment out of Congress and forwarded to the states for ratification. But second states have another option if this doesnt work. They would need to make good on their threat to call for a convention. Such a bold step will need to be taken carefully. States should appoint delegates to this convention who are limited by law to consideration of only one amendment: the Madison Amendment. Delegates should pledge to respect that limit before they are appointed and legal ramifications for breaking that pledge should be explored. Further the state legislature should pledge in advance not to ratify any unauthorized amendments produced by the convention. This latter route is not without risk but such deliberate action by the states should minimize the risk of a runaway convention. And lets face it America is rapidly approaching a point where some risks may be necessary if we are to save the republic. Few in Washington can be trusted to reverse course and make things right. Yes of course the November elections will help. Democrats have taken the country in a direction that most Americans do not like. But it is far from clear that Republican leaders are ready to take the drastic steps that will be necessary to stop the bleeding and reverse course. Many Republican leaders have still supported their own establishment candidates in the primaries even as voters have ousted those same big-spending incumbents from office. Some Republicans such as Congressmen Jeb Hensarling or Paul Ryan understand that we need more than a band-aid to make our current budgetary problems go away. But most of the leadership (still) does not appear to get it. The federal government is expanding its reach at an exponential rate. Its rapid growth is unsustainable as a fiscal matter and inadvisable as a policy matter. Things are rapidly advancing to a point where voters must take matters into their own hands. The Madison Amendment could help them to do just that. Tara Ross is a former Editor-in-Chief of the Texas Review of Law & Politics and a former associate of Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. She obtained her B.A. from Rice University and her J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law.