Seven ways Rick Perry wants to change the Constitution
from the site :
 
_The  Ticket_ (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/)  – Fri, Aug  19, 2011



 
Rick Perry has many ideas about how to change the American government's  
founding document. From ending lifetime tenure for federal judges to 
completely  scrapping two whole amendments, the Constitution would see a major 
overhaul if  the Texas governor and Republican presidential candidate had his 
druthers.  
Perry laid out these proposed innovations to the founding document in his  
book, Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington. He has  
occasionally mentioned them on the campaign trail. Several of his ideas fall  
within 
the realm of mainstream conservative thinking today, but, as you will  see, 
there are also a few surprises. 
1. Abolish lifetime tenure for federal  judges by amending Article III, 
Section I of the Constitution. 
The nation's framers established a federal court system whereby judges with 
 "good behavior" would be secure in their job for life. Perry believes that 
 provision is ready for an overhaul. 
"The Judges," reads Article III, "both of the supreme and inferior Courts,  
shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times,  
receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished 
during  their Continuance in Office." 
Perry makes it no secret that he believes the judges on the bench over the  
past century have acted beyond their constitutional bounds. The problem, 
Perry  reasons, is that members of the judiciary are "unaccountable" to the 
people, and  their lifetime tenure gives them free license to act however they 
want. In his  book, the governor speaks highly of plans to limit their 
tenure and offers  proposals about how to accomplish it. 
"'[W]e should take steps to restrict the unlimited power of the courts to  
rule over us with no accountability," he writes in Fed Up! "There are a  
number of ideas about how to do this . . . . One such reform would be to  
institute term limits on what are now lifetime appointments for federal judges, 
 
particularly those on the Supreme Court or the circuit courts, which have so 
 much power. One proposal, for example, would have judges roll off every 
two  years based on seniority." 
2. Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions  with 
a two-thirds vote. 
Ending lifetime tenure for federal justices isn't the only way Perry has  
proposed suppressing the power of the courts. His book excoriates at length 
what  he sees as overreach from the judicial branch. (The title of Chapter 
Six is  "Nine Unelected Judges Tell Us How to Live.") 
Giving Congress the ability to veto their decisions would be another way to 
 take the Court down a notch, Perry says. 
"[A]llow Congress to override the Supreme Court with a  two-thirds vote in 
both the House and Senate, which risks increased  politicization of judicial 
decisions, but also has the benefit of letting the  people stop the Court 
from unilaterally deciding policy," he writes. 
3. Scrap the federal income tax by repealing the Sixteenth  Amendment.
The Sixteenth Amendment gives Congress the "power to lay and collect taxes 
on  incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the 
several  States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." It should 
be abolished  immediately, Perry says. 
Calling the Sixteenth Amendment "the great milestone on the road to 
serfdom,"  Perry's writes that it provides a virtually blank check to the 
federal  
government to use for projects with little or no consultation from the  
states. 
4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth  
Amendment.
Overturning this amendment would restore the original language of the  
Constitution, which gave state legislators the power to appoint the members of  
the Senate. 
Ratified during the Progressive Era in 1913 , the same year as the 
Sixteenth  Amendment, the Seventeenth Amendment gives citizens the ability to 
elect  
senators on their own. Perry writes that supporters of the amendment at the 
time  were "mistakenly" propelled by "a fit of populist rage." 
"The American people mistakenly empowered the federal government during a 
fit  of populist rage in the early twentieth century by giving it an 
unlimited source  of income (the Sixteenth Amendment) and by changing the way 
senators are elected  (the Seventeenth Amendment)," he writes. 
5. Require the federal government to balance its budget every  year. 
Of all his proposed ideas, Perry calls this one "the most important," and 
of  all the plans, a balanced budget amendment likely has the best chance of  
passage. 
"The most important thing we could do is amend the Constitution--now--to  
restrict federal spending," Perry writes in his book. "There are generally  
thought to be two options: the traditional 'balanced budget amendment' or a  
straightforward 'spending limit amendment,' either of which would be a  
significant improvement. I prefer the latter . . . . Let's use the people's  
document--the Constitution--to put an actual spending limit in place to control 
 the beast in Washington." 
A campaign to pass a balanced budget amendment through Congress fell short 
by  just one vote in the Senate in the 1990s. 
Last year, House Republicans proposed a spending-limit amendment that would 
 limit federal spending to 20 percent of the economy. According to the  
amendment's language, the restriction could be overridden by a two-thirds vote  
in both Houses of Congress or by a declaration of war. 
6. The federal Constitution should define marriage as between one man  and 
one woman in all 50 states.  
Despite saying last month that he was "fine with" states like New York  
allowing gay marriage, Perry has now said he supports a constitutional 
amendment  that would permanently ban gay marriage throughout the country and 
overturn any  state laws that define marriage beyond a relationship between one 
man and one  woman. 
"I do respect a state's right to have a different opinion and take a  
different tack if you will, California did that," Perry _told the Christian 
Broadcasting Network in August_ 
(http://blogs.cbn.com/beltwaybuzz/archive/2011/08/04/perry-comfortable-with-support-of-marriage-abortion-constitutional-amendm
ents.aspx) . "I  respect that right, but our founding fathers also said, 
'Listen, if you all in  the future think things are so important that you need 
to change the  Constitution here's the way you do it'. 
In _an interview with The Ticket_ 
(http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/understanding-rick-perry-views-states-rights-182814623.html)
  earlier this month, 
Perry  spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said that even though it would 
overturn laws in  several states, the amendment still fits into Perry's broader 
philosophy because  amendments require the ratification of three-fourths of 
the states to be added  to the Constitution. 
7. Abortion should be made illegal throughout the country.  
Like the gay marriage issue, Perry at one time believed that abortion 
policy  should be left to the states, as was the case before the 1973 Supreme 
Court case  Roe v. Wade. But in the same Christian Broadcasting Network 
interview,  Perry said that he would support a federal amendment outlawing 
abortion 
because  it was "so important...to the soul of this country and to the 
traditional values  [of] our founding fathers."

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to