[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)

"Transcript: Mrs. Erika Kirk Delivers Public Address: ‘His Movement Will Go On’"

"Victor Davis Hanson to Newsmax: Kirk Slaying Crosses Rubicon"

Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk

Charlotte train murder: Graphic video captures random fatal stabbing of young Ukrainian refugee

Berlin in July 1945 - Probably the best restored film material you'll watch from that time!

Ok this is Funny

Walking Through 1980s Los Angeles: The City That Reinvented Cool

THE ZOMBIES OF AMERICA

THE OLDEST PHOTOS OF NEW YORK YOU'VE NEVER SEEN

John Rich – Calling Out P. Diddy, TVA Scandal, and Joel Osteen | SRS #232

Capablanca Teaches Us The ONLY Chess Opening You'll Ever Need

"How Bruce Springsteen Fooled America"

How ancient Rome was excavated in Italy in the 1920s. Unique rare videos and photos.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Governor Abbott Unveils Texas Plan, Offers Constitutional Amendments To Restore The Rule Of Law
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jan 8, 2016
Author: Guidrey to
Post Date: 2016-01-08 16:26:34 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 2463
Comments: 20

Governor Abbott Unveils Texas Plan, Offers Constitutional Amendments To Restore The Rule Of Law

AUSTIN – Governor Greg Abbott today delivered the keynote address at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Annual Policy Orientation where he unveiled his Texas Plan to restore the Rule of Law and return the Constitution to its intended purpose. In his plan, Governor Abbott offers nine constitutional amendments to rein in the federal government and restore the balance of power between the States and the United States. The Governor proposes achieving the constitutional amendments through a Convention Of States.

“The increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,” said Governor Abbott. “We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way. To do that I am adding another item to the agenda next session. I want legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

Governor Abbott went on to explain that dysfunction in Washington, D.C. stems largely from the federal government’s refusal to follow the Constitution. Congress routinely violates its enumerated powers, while taxing and spending its way from one financial crisis to another. The President exceeds his executive powers to impose heavy-handed regulations. And the Supreme Court imposes its policy views under the guise of judicial interpretation. Governor Abbott urged action by Texas – and other states – to restore the Rule of Law in America.

Governor Abbott offered the following constitutional amendments:

1. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State.

2. Require Congress to balance its budget.

3. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from creating federal law.

4. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from preempting state law.

5. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

6. Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law.

7. Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.

8. Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.

9. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.

To view Governor Abbott's full plan, click here. - See more at: guidrynews.com/story.aspx?id=1000074518#.dpuf

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: tpaine (#0)

Why not just define "regulate" as to make regular, instead of rules meant to inhibit trade?

jeremiad  posted on  2016-01-08   16:36:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: tpaine (#0)

Why not just define "regulate" as to make regular, instead of rules meant to inhibit trade? Get rid of direct election of Senators, return it to appointment by State legislatures.

jeremiad  posted on  2016-01-08   16:38:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: jeremiad (#2)

Why not just define "regulate" as to make regular, instead of rules meant to inhibit trade? Get rid of direct election of Senators, return it to appointment by State legislatures.

Because we're far beyond the point where this opinion, or that amendment would fix the problem.

Our whole system is infested with people who genuinely believe that how the Constitution has been interpreted to date, -- is just fine.

Only a constitutional convention, clearing up the original concepts, (as per the article) --- will force them to accept the fact that they are WRONG...

tpaine  posted on  2016-01-08   17:02:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: jeremiad (#1)

"1. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State."

So Congress can regulate interstate flights, but not flights within a state.

Oh, that should work. But hey, a couple of mid-air collisions per month is the price we pay for freedom.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-01-08   18:24:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: misterwhite (#4)

Why does the government have to control flights and flight paths anyway? Aren't those making the money invested enough in safety to pay for it themselves? If not, they will be broke right quick. Government can screw up, and never have to pay a dime or go away.

jeremiad  posted on  2016-01-08   19:20:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: All (#3)

Holding a Con-Con is a trap. What you would get out of it will have no resemblance to our current Constitution, no Bill of Rights, certainly no Second Amendment. When anyone suggests holding a Con-Con, just assume it's a con job to finish off America or someone who is very foolishly perceiving what isn't there.

Psalm 37

Don  posted on  2016-01-08   20:04:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: tpaine, TooConservative, redleghunter (#0)

Instead, the states must lead the way. To do that I am adding another item to the agenda next session. I want legislation authorizing Texas to join other states in calling for a Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution.”

And here I had thought that Texas would be leading the way in this effort for an Art. V convention.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

tomder55  posted on  2016-01-09   4:03:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Don (#6)

Holding a Con-Con is a trap. What you would get out of it will have no resemblance to our current Constitution, no Bill of Rights, certainly no Second Amendment. When anyone suggests holding a Con-Con, just assume it's a con job to finish off America or someone who is very foolishly perceiving what isn't there.

No it's not . All a convention would do is propose amendments . The ratification process remains the same (when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof,). The only difference is that the amendment proposals don't originate in Congress. Let's put it this way. Would Congress ever put in amendments that would restrict the powers of the Federal Government ? Doubtful . Would they propose a term limit for Congress or Federal justices ?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

tomder55  posted on  2016-01-09   4:12:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Don (#6)

Holding a Con-Con is a trap. What you would get out of it will have no resemblance to our current Constitution, no Bill of Rights, certainly no Second Amendment. When anyone suggests holding a Con-Con, just assume it's a con job to finish off America or someone who is very foolishly perceiving what isn't there.

There are damned few people today who can be trusted.

rlk  posted on  2016-01-09   4:51:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: tpaine (#3)

Get rid of direct election of Senators, return it to appointment by State legislatures.

State legislatures that are just as corrupt as the clowns in Washington.

rlk  posted on  2016-01-09   5:00:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: tomder55 (#7)

And here I had thought that Texas would be leading the way in this effort for an Art. V convention.

Seems prophetic since that is what the gov wants.

Abbott is a good man.

Tooconservative  posted on  2016-01-09   9:22:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: jeremiad (#5)

"Why does the government have to control flights and flight paths anyway?"

Have to? No, they don't have to. My point was they have the Commerce Clause power to do so, and that power includes the control of air traffic completely within a state.

We all look at that and say, "Sure. That simply makes sense." In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has said it makes sense.

But there are some who interpret the U.S. Constitution literally -- as though that makes them constitutional scholars -- in order to advance their personal agenda.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-01-09   10:40:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: misterwhite, jeremiad, Y'ALL (#12)

Jeremiad--- Why not just define "regulate" as to make regular, instead of rules meant to inhibit trade?

Because we're far beyond the point where correcting this scotus opinion would fix the problem.

Our whole system is infested with people who genuinely believe that how the Constitution has been interpreted to date, -- is just fine. ---- (As we see from misterwhites silly example about aviation regulations).

Only a constitutional convention, clearing up the original concepts, (as per the article) --- will force them to accept the fact that they are WRONG...

misterwhite --- My point was they have the Commerce Clause power to do so, and that power includes the control of air traffic completely within a state. --- We all look at that and say, "Sure. That simply makes sense." In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has said it makes sense.

And the fact is,-- That the feds only control commercial air traffic between commercial airports, which makes sense, -- which fact doesn't justify the Fed gov controlling ALL COMMERCE between states/individuals, contrary to constitutional principles.

misterwhite--- But there are some who interpret the U.S. Constitution literally -- as though that makes them constitutional scholars -- in order to advance their personal agenda.

Strange comment, considering misterwhites obviously socialistic, big gov agenda.

tpaine  posted on  2016-01-09   14:25:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: tpaine (#13)

Only a constitutional convention, clearing up the original concepts, (as per the article) --- will force them to accept the fact that they are WRONG...

You're delusional if you think to days pols could create something superior to the constitution of our forefathers.

I posted an article on this here today.

libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=44125

Roy Batty  posted on  2016-01-09   14:35:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: misterwhite (#12)

But there are some who interpret the U.S. Constitution literally

Definition of literally- (of a translation) representing the exact words of the original text.

Mr. White should we intrepret them with ebonics? You liberals and your living constitution.

That comment was just goofy and uninformed.

Roy Batty  posted on  2016-01-09   14:41:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Roy Batty (#14)

Our whole system is infested with people who genuinely believe that how the Constitution has been interpreted to date, -- is just fine. ---- (As we see from misterwhites silly example about aviation regulations).

Only a constitutional convention, clearing up the original concepts, (as per the article) --- will force them to accept the fact that they are WRONG...

You're delusional if you think to days pols could create something superior to the constitution of our forefathers.

Read much? I'm for reiterating the original concepts, not changing them..

I posted an article on this here today.

libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=44125

Yep, and I agree with the dangers outlined of a runaway convention. -- But if a runaway occurred, 'we the people' would never accept its results, -- leaving us where we are now, catering to a bunch of socialistic fools like misterwhite.

tpaine  posted on  2016-01-09   15:04:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: tpaine (#16)

But if a runaway occurred, 'we the people' would never accept its results, -- leaving us where we are now, catering to a bunch of socialistic fools like misterwhite.

We're accepting the results right now.

What makes you think people would change suddenly?

They wouldn't.

Better not to tamper with it.

Roy Batty  posted on  2016-01-09   15:21:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Roy Batty (#17)

I agree with the dangers outlined of a runaway convention. -- But if a runaway occurred, 'we the people' would never accept its results, -- leaving us where we are now, catering to a bunch of socialistic fools like misterwhite.

We're accepting the results right now.

No, we're trying to change the system, --- back to one of constitutional principles..

What makes you think people would change suddenly? They wouldn't. Better not to tamper with it.

You're saying we should just continue on down the road to misterwhite type socialism? -- That there is no solution?

tpaine  posted on  2016-01-09   15:46:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Roy Batty (#15)

"Definition of literally- (of a translation) representing the exact words of the original text."

A literal translation of free speech means all speech including libel, slander, and "shouting fire in a theater". Is that what the Founders meant?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-01-09   18:44:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: All (#0)

Abbot is on Kelly's show now, flacking his plan. -- I'm surprised Kelly has him on, -- but there's no such thing as bad publicity...

tpaine  posted on  2016-01-11   21:34:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com