• Posted on Thursday, February 24, 2011
  • Bookmark and Share
  • email
  • |
  • print
  • |
  • rss

tool name

close
tool goes here

Texas' effort to amend U.S. Constitution draws conservative critics

email this story print this story jump to comments

In the latest round of Texas vs. Washington, D.C., some Republican lawmakers in Austin want to rein in the federal government by amending the U.S. Constitution.

The measures are drawing opposition from Democrats who see the proposals as misguided and from an unexpected constituency: conservatives who fear that the efforts will mean open season on their most treasured political document.

"It's a terrible idea," Texas Eagle Forum President Pat Carlson said. "It opens the door for radicals to move in and completely rewrite the Constitution."

Two amendments are gaining support in more than a dozen state capitols. One would require the federal government to pass a balanced budget with few exceptions. The other would permit the repeal of any federal law by vote of two-thirds of state legislatures.

"We're trying to restore the balance of power between the states and the federal government," said Marianne Moran of RepealAmendment.org in Florida. She said repeal-amendment resolutions have been proposed in at least 14 states.

On Wednesday, the Texas Senate voted 24-7 for a resolution calling for a balanced budget amendment. It is one of about six such measures filed this session, along with three repeal-amendment resolutions. Two other measures urge amendments on both topics as well as congressional term limits, a cap on the national debt and a presidential line-item veto.

The balanced budget amendment appears to have stronger interest among Republican leaders in Texas. Last month, Gov. Rick Perry made it one of his emergency items, allowing the Legislature to take up the issue sooner.

The U.S. Constitution can be amended in two ways, both spelled out in one sentence that makes up Article V. They end with the same requirement: a minimum of 38 states must ratify the amendment. The difference is the path to get to that final step, and that's sparking a passionate, though admittedly arcane, debate.

The simpler way is for two-thirds of both chambers of Congress to approve the amendment. The other route is a constitutional convention, a national meeting to consider amendments that must be called if 34 states ask for one. None of the Constitution's 27 amendments were approved via a constitutional convention. Yet that's the approach Republicans are pursuing in most of the resolutions filed in Austin.

The Constitution provides little guidance on how a convention would be set up, prompting fears of a free-for-all.

To read the complete article, visit www.star-telegram.com.

  • Bookmark and Share
  • email
  • |
  • print
  • |
  • rss

tool name

close
tool goes here
JOIN THE DISCUSSION

We welcome comments. To post one, you must sign in using either your McClatchyDC login or your login for Facebook, Twitter or Disqus. Just click the appropriate box below.

Please keep your comment civil, short and to the point. Obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. If you find a comment abusive or inappropriate, please flag it for the moderator by placing your cursor on the comment, then clicking the "flag" link that appears. Thanks for your participation.

Stay Connected

Sign up for email newsletters RSS
Follow us on your iPhone Follow us on your Android device
Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us using Google Currents

POLITICS & GOVERNMENT BLOG

Planet Washington

"Planet Washington" is a group blog by journalists in McClatchy's Washington Bureau. Send a story suggestion.