I thought so myself. That is until I found out that this bill died. It is called the Enumerated Powers Act, so named because it refers to the 10th Amendment which limits the federal government's powers to things specifically enumerated in the Constitution. It states:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."This bill would require congress to list the constitutional authority for each bill brought forward to become a law. It makes sense to me. If you want to pass a bill you should know by what authority you are doing so. The problem is that this bill has been proposed by Representative John Shadegg (R-AZ) since 1995, and it has yet to come up for a vote. This last year it finally had 53 co-sponsors in the House and finally saw the senate floor thanks to Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). But despite being the most obvious law ever it hasn't made it anywhere. It's been killed.
I am convinced that this bill keeps being relegated to eternal committee because no one knows about it. If we push our legislators to advance it then it will pass. It is up to us. Our own government has successfully hidden this issue for too long. Open people's eyes please. Draw some attention to this bill and to what our representatives are doing. There is a great article about the entire issue at the great Heritage Foundation website. You can find out what happened to the bill here. Check it out and see if your representative signed on to it. I haven't completely vetted this site, but on the surface it looks great, and has already begun the campaign to bring this issue to a vote.
Posts
4 comments:
I am wary of passing ANY laws. The more laws we have, the fewer freedoms or choices we have. At first glance this sounds like a bill that I want to support. However, what is the constitutionality of this bill?
Looks like Chris Cannon and Rob Bishop co-sponsored it. That is good to hear.
Jonathan, the constitutional authority for this bill is listed as the first thing following the title.
To quote the bill, "Constitutional Authority for This Act- This Act is enacted pursuant to the power granted Congress under article I, section 8, clause 18, of the United States Constitution and the power granted to each House of Congress under article I, section 5, clause 2, of the United States Constitution."
Article I, section 8, clause 18 states, "Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
and
Article I, section 5, clause 2 states "Clause 2: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member. "
It looks pretty clear to me that this bill is constitutional.
Dr. Duncan,
You made very good points in this blog entry. I also appreciated you explaining what this bill would mean.
At first (and second) glance, I agree with you. Authority is a very sacred thing. It is something we, as a society, view important enough that we vote for who we give authority to.
It is also something that our nation is predicated on. The founding fathers recognized the sanctity of it. Perhaps they saw the potential hazard of giving one entity too much authority, therefore constructed the Constitution in the way that reflects concern for this very issue.
Very good point. Thank you.
Post a Comment