GOP to force all bills to cite the Constitution?

[Matt Collins]

House GOP: Bills will have to cite Constitution

Fulfilling one of their most prominent campaign promises, House Republican leaders have unveiled a new rule to require that each bill filed in the House “cite its specific constitutional authority.”

GOP leaders have prepared a memo for all members of the new Congress and senior staff informing them that no bill may be introduced unless the sponsor has submitted for the Congressional Record a statement “citing as specifically as practicable the power or powers granted to Congress” to enact the measure. The memo included five examples of forms that sponsors could include with their legislation.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46565.html#ixzz18RI72Pom​

​

​

 

[Bruno]

Excellent!

 

[Matt Collins]

The GWC and ICC will probably be the most over-written phrases in DC for the next few years.

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

The GWC and ICC will probably be the most over-written phrases in DC for the next few years.

This, honestly.

The Constitution hasn't stopped some of the most invasive and destructive pieces of legislation in the past, mostly due to repeated twisting of these two clauses... what makes anyone think it will suddenly stop now that this will be required by the GOP? It also amazes me that (most of) the GOP thinks they have any credibility whatsoever in suggesting this... have they completely forgotten about their own role in creating the problems we have today? Maybe the intent is good, but it's very hard to trust most of them.

We'll see. But right now I'm very skeptical.

 

[low preference guy]

The GWC and ICC will probably be the most over-written phrases in DC for the next few years.

Good. Then voters can be shown that and be asked to support amending the Constitution to repeal the commerce clause.

 

[Matt Collins]

As Lysnader Spooner once remarked: "The Constitution either gives us the government we have, or it's powerless to prevent it; either way it is unfit to exist".

 

[CableNewsJunkie]

Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

 

[guitarlifter]

I could see this going either very well or very poorly, depending on how dishonest congressmen want to be. Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question.

 

[Captain America]

<really!?> Why has this not always been the case. <really!?/> I feel like we've been screwed. We have this Constitution to protect liberty. This should be without saying and I'm thinking thats what the framers also thought. What the hell are we letting them get away with. Come on now.

 

[malkusm]

Yeah, the GWC and ICC will be vastly overcited, BUT at least they are paying attention to the Constitution and acknowledging its existance. Additionally, this might make challenges of legislation on Constitutional grounds; before, SCOTUS simply could choose some language in the Constitution to fit their needs. If they have to focus on a particular clause, this will further restrict them.

 

[cswake]

Wouldn't they have to do this section-by-section and line-by-line rather than a single bill? Just a single reference for a bill will not really help.

 

[awake]

The conveyor belt of legislation must be slowed then stopped. This is the other printing machine that is debasing America. Anything that does this is welcome in my book.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

This, honestly.

The Constitution hasn't stopped some of the most invasive and destructive pieces of legislation in the past, mostly due to repeated twisting of these two clauses... what makes anyone think it will suddenly stop now that this will be required by the GOP? It also amazes me that (most of) the GOP thinks they have any credibility whatsoever in suggesting this... have they completely forgotten about their own role in creating the problems we have today? Maybe the intent is good, but it's very hard to trust most of them.

We'll see. But right now I'm very skeptical.

Good. Then voters can be shown that and be asked to support amending the Constitution to repeal the commerce clause.

That.

This is a great thing. Right off the bat it will do little to stem the tide of nonsense legislation, but exposure is a key element toward affecting reform.

Now, if this goes into effect and stays in effect, instead of having to educate the voters on the entire Constitution, our work gets a whole lot easier in that we will be able to focus on debunking the modern interpretation of two minor clauses to demonstrate the inappropriate behavior of Congress.

"Why in the world does 95% of all legislation in Congress rely on two minor non-enumerated and mostly incidental clauses in the US Constitution?"

That question will have a lot more moment in light of these new rules than it does now. It will make our job of awakening a sleeping population much easier. So I am very glad to see this.

 

[Thomas]

this is a good development

 

[pcosmar]

this is a good development

I can't wait to see the linguistic gymnastics.

 

[RideTheDirt]

i can't wait to see the linguistic gymnastics.

+1776 :d

 

[Fox McCloud]

The GWC and ICC will probably be the most over-written phrases in DC for the next few years.

yup...this bill could be a huge detriment to liberty lovers and strict Constitutionalist. The current interpretation of both of those phrases is, at the very best, incredibly broad--if it ends up being repeatedly used, as justification, for bills that are non really Constitutional (within the strict definition), this could cement, in people's minds, forever (or at the very least a very long time) that "X", "Y", and "Z" are "Constitutional" merely because they cite two horrendously misinterpreted sections of the Constitution.

 

[Matt Collins]

I don't think it'll make a dime's worth of difference ever. I think federal restraint is going to HAVE to come from the State legislatures via nullification in tandem with interposition.

 

[SirBlend12]

While the principle of the idea is good, the actual practice will probably do little to stop the BS that Congress regularly pulls, mostly because of ICC and GWC (just echoing what seems to be the most common probability because, well, it seems likely that this would happen). However, I'm willing to admit that it might not be the worst idea and that it MAY do SOMETHING to stop the Chaongress from their shenanigans.

 

[doodle]

GOP supports Patriot Act still?