Update from the Heartland
No.692
16.3.15 – 22.3.15
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The orbit of Mother Earth reached the
vernal equinox at 22:45 UTC/GMT {17:45 [S] CDT], Friday, 20.March.2015. It is officially springtime . . . at
least in astronomical terms. Happy
Spring to all. In addition,
Europeans experienced a solar eclipse from 07:41 UTC to 11:50 UTC on Friday,
with the full solar umbra tracking across the Faroe Islands, Norway.
Republicans in the Kansas Legislature are
reportedly considering whether the state will join the constitutional
convention movement.
“States urged to call for convention amending U.S.
Constitution”
by Brad Cooper
Wichita Eagle
Published: 03/20/2015 4:25 PM, Updated: 03/21/2015 7:32 AM
Article V of the Constitution requires Congress
to call for a constitutional convention upon application by the legislatures of
2/3 of the states (34). Any
amendment to the Constitution from such a convention would require 3/4 of the
states (38) [assumed to be state legislatures, rather than by public vote] to
ratify the change(s). The professed
public rationale for a constitutional convention cover numerous populist topics,
including:
Fiscal
constraints on federal spending,
Balanced budget,
Term limits for
Congress, or
Constraints upon election
donations and spending to override the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling [558
U.S. 310 (2010)] [424].
The potential scope of a constitutional convention would
become a topic for vigorous public debate and undoubtedly for legal
challenge. Article V provides very little
guidance beyond the use of the words “. . . for proposing Amendments . . . ,” id est, what does ‘amendments’
mean? Given the precedent of the 13th
Amendment, which superseded (voided) Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3, of
the original Constitution (1788), constraints upon a constitutional convention
would be hard to imagine. Thus, in
this debate, we must assume there are no boundaries since none are defined by
the Constitution, id est, a properly
convened constitutional convention could rewrite the entire document. There is little, if any, doubt the
constitutional convention method of amending (or rewriting) the Constitution is
the business of the states – not the people, other than via their elected
representatives. This opens the
entire money dimension – who can buy the most influence on the process. Further, given the penchant of social
conservatives within this Grand Republic, we must consider the potential that a
constitutional convention might well choose to address matters of contemporary
political contention, exempli gratia:
Citizen’s privacy rights (if any),
Establishment of a State religion,
Term limits for or election of the Judiciary,
Personhood defined as the instant of conception,
Apportionment, or
a host of
morality issues, like marriage, sexuality, life style choices, pornography,
death with dignity, obscenity, prostitution, psychotropic substance
consumption, gun rights, et cetera ad
infinitum ad nauseum.
The number of states who have already made application is
rather confusing. According to the
Cooper article, three state legislatures have passed bills of application
calling for a constitutional convention – Georgia, Florida and Alaska; and,
26 other states, including Kansas, are considering bills of application. Other sources suggest the 34-state
threshold was crossed in 2010, when Michigan submitted an application. The difficulty here rests upon how that
count is determined and what the rules are for the process. To my knowledge and a search of the
Internet, Congress has not yet called for a constitutional convention. Further, it is not clear who exactly is
the keeper of the official count.
At the end of the day, a constitutional convention is a really bad idea
and fraught with risks of incalculable dimensions. Risking the very foundation of this Grand Republic, because
foolish ideologues never learned the art of compromise, has zero appeal for me. In this instance, stalemate is better
than trusting the very politicians who brought us to this sad state of affairs
to fix things. Eventually, we will
find leaders who appreciate the value and meaning of the words negotiation and
compromise.
News from the economic front:
-- Sveriges Riksbank, Sweden's central bank, lowered its
benchmark rate to minus 0.25% from minus 0.1%, and the bank indicated it would
buy government bonds worth kr30B (US$3.45B) to counter recent krona
appreciation.
-- The Federal Reserve concluded its scheduled two-day meeting and dropped
the word ‘patient’ from its public announcement, which many believe signals the
Fed’s willingness to raise short-term interest rates by midyear, but offered
several reasons it is still in no great rush to do so. The Fed also indicated it would raise
rates when it is reasonably confident that low inflation is on track to return
to its 2% target and as long as the job market continues to improve.
Comments
and contributions from Update no.691:
Comment to the Blog:
“I am not an aviation aficionado; however, I am a renewable power
student and enthusiast. The import of the Solar Impulse 2 for me is the solar
cells and especially the batteries that will meet this high demand. I have not
been able to find useful technical information about either during a casual
search. Airborne flight, as I am sure you know, is a larger energy challenge
than any other means of transport. Meeting that challenge should produce
further progress in batteries and solar power collection.
“If the Logan Act of 1799 remains valid and enforceable,
it should be enforced on the 47 Senators who have openly violated it. Probably
it has not needed enforcement before. Few of the powerful are so brash. The
current Congress may have the most arrogantly foolhardy majority in history.
“Marijuana came to Wichita, Kansas, long ago. Decriminalization
may be on its way.
“We shall see over time what results from the Fed's stress test.
As we have seen in the past, the big banks have ways of changing outcomes.”
My response to the
Blog:
Re:
Solar Impulse 2. Well said. I expect efforts and achievements like
this endeavor will help us along the way to weaning ourselves off fossil fuels.
Re:
Logan Act. Yes, certainly, the law should be
enforced or repealed. I am
disappointed the more experienced members did not rein in such a young, foolish,
freshman senator. There have
always been firebrands in Congress, but in the past, their ardor was
sufficiently dampened.
Re:
drugs. Yes, and I shall vote for
this small baby step on the path to more reasonable treatment of consumption of
psychotropic substances including THC.
Re:
big banks. You are probably
correct, but I hope not.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
2 comments:
The Constitutional Convention folks are not organized and/or effective. Therefore, what they want is scary but unlikely to come about. After all, they cannot even say with any authority how many states are on board their train wreck. Even if they get through several phases of their notion (unlikely), they would still need approval by three quarters of the states. I refuse to believe that so many legislators are compromised or insane, even now.
Calvin,
The Constitution has stood us in good stead and survived a horrific civil war, numerous challenges, political divisions, societal traumas and even a seriously ill-advised amendment. Even the remotest potential to cast it aside for a “better” document is too much risk for me to comprehend. As I read Article V, it is the state legislatures that would approve changes proposed by a constitutional convention, and frankly I do not trust state politicians any more than I do the federal version – they are simply too susceptible to money. And, to me, money is just another form of royalty and the divine right of kings. No thank you; I say we stay with what we know works.
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment