The U.S. Constitution - Lesson #17: Amending the Constitution

FACEBOOK READERS:   Please go to my blog site (http://ajbulava.blogspot.com) and sign up to be a follower.  You will receive an email in your inbox when I update.  Also Facebook postings do not include any videos pictures or links that may be embedded in the articles so you might be missing out on some good content.  Thanks!

We are winding down in the Constitutional lessons.  Only a few more weeks before this crazy train ride, that started my blogging comes to an end.  I need some new ideas of what I could teach in my Saturday slot.  If their are any ideas please let me know.  I may continue on with the Bill of Rights, but I may not.  Either way this trip is coming to an end and I need a new one to start.

Today's lesson focuses on the fifth article of the Constitution and as the title proclaims, it is all about Amending the Constitution.  So lets get started. 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,

The Constitution provides two ways that an amendment may be proposed to it.  When I teach this material to my students I tell them to remember the magic number of two-thirds to remember the first step in the amendment process.  Both require two-thirds of something.  The first and most common way is for two-thirds, sometimes called a super majority, of both houses of Congress to pass the bill.  This is a high water mark to reach.  That requires 67 Senators and 291 Representatives to all agree to the same thing, which is just an unheard of event.  The founders though provided a secondary method just in case the Congress was unwilling or unable to propose amendments

The other method involves two-thirds of the states, specifically the legislatures, calling for a Constitutional convention, to propose amendments.  This method has never been used to amend the Constitution.  All twenty-seven amendments were proposed by Congress.  I think most people fear the repercussions of calling a constitutional convention.  The last time we did that the smartest people in the nation came together and created the document we are now studying.  Do you trust any of the people who are our "leaders" to possibly create a new constitution?  I don't. 

which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;

The Constitution again provides two ways to ratify a proposed amendment in the last step; both methods require action by the state.  The other magic number I ask my students to remember when learning the amending process for our constitution is three-fourths.  The first way is the easiest and most commonly used method.  Three-fourths of the state legislatures must approve of the proposed amendment.  This does not need to be by a super majority, so a simple majority in thirty-eight states must approve of the amendment.

The other method is a bit more convoluted and depends a lot on state law.  The states can call conventions to specifically ratify the proposed amendment.  This is similar to how the Constitution was ratified.  Once thirty-eight states ratify the amendment either by legislatures or conventions the amendment becomes part of the Constitution. 

A quick note on the conventions route on steps one and two.  During the proposing step, the convention being used is a national convention with the states being called, similar to the 1787 Philadelphia Convention.  The conventions called in the ratifying step are state wide conventions that only happen inside the individual states.

Also another fact most people forget.  Congress is responsible for choosing the method of ratification for all amendments.  The only amendment to be ratified by state conventions was the twenty-first amendment that repealed Prohibition.

Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Here again we find the fictional pro-slavery slant of the Constitution.  I have dealt with this issue at length in a previous lesson.  So I won't dwell on it more here.  This was only about protecting the state's right to import slaves.  Once the time frame elapsed the first thing the Congress did was end the slave trade in the U.S.  This also protects the equal suffrage of the states in the U.S. Senate.  It is unlikely that any state will ever do this but it is a good protection to have inside the Constitution.

That does it for this lesson.  Next week's lesson will focus on Article IV.  This is where we find the world famous and Anti-Federalist fearful Supremacy Clause.  Tuesday's article will address some concerns a colleague of mine has with the idea of Original Intent as a method for interpreting the Constitution.  It will be a long one so make sure you get your rest.

Questions?  Comments?  Concerns?  Class dismissed!

Public Policy: Reforming the Executive Bureacracy - Part I (EOP)

Today's Public Policy article will focus on one of the ways, if I was the President, reform the Executive Branch.  The key aspect of these reforms would be to do them through the legislative process as much as possible.  It is the job of Congress to send the different parts of the reform to be approved by legislative means instead of by Executive fiat.  Though if Congress should fail to act on such vital reforms to our bureaucracy I would use whatever constitutional authority granted to me to enact as many of these measures as possible.

Today's part of the discussion focuses in the area of the executive branch known as the Executive Office of the President.  Here is some background knowledge on this part of the government very few people know about.

Historical Background
The Executive Office of the President (EOP) was created in 1939 under the administration of President Roosevelt.  The Reorganization Act of 1939 created it and is responsible for the modern White House staff that we see today in the modern presidency of advisers, councils, and czars (or special advisers).    Prior to this law the President had very little staff to assist him with his work.  Jefferson had a secretary and clerk that he paid for out of his own pocket.  It was not until 1857 that the Congress appropriated money for any White House staff.  Most of the parts of the EOP were created by public law or executive orders and have expanded since 1939 to the size we see today.

The EOP was a idea of the Brownlow Committee which gave three suggestions.  First was the creation of aides to the President to help him with administrative tasks of the job.  Secondly, it suggested that the President have direct control over any administrative departments (i.e. Department of State or Defense).  Lastly, they suggested that the managerial offices of the Civil Service Administration, Bureau of the Budget, and the National Resources Board be part of the Executive Office.  Two of these three suggestions were incorporated into the final law.  The law gave Roosevelt the authority to make changes to the various agencies and corporations within cabinet level departments.  It also created six executive level assistance to the President.

The EOP Today
If you want to see the different agencies and advisory groups the President has at his disposal check out the White House website on the EOP.  Most of these positions are appointed directly by the President but very few require confirmation by the Senate, which could be seen as a violation of the Constitution based on the powers laid out in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2:

he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

According to this part of the Constitution all appointed position must be approved of by public law, so these special advisers or czars must be passed into law by Congress and approved of by the President.  Also they must all be confirmed by the Senate before taking office.  We have removed a very important check and balance to our system by creating an office in which the President may appoint anyone he wishes without any Senatorial oversight.  But I am getting off on a tangent.

The fact is that every President has added to this bureaucracy that is intended to help the President do his job of enforce the law.  I am not sure exactly why he needs all these advisers to do that job, since its not a job that requires advice, just action.  Their should be no debate on how a law should be enforced since the law should expressly say how it should be enforced and the punishments required.  The fact is though that it needs to be parried back and restrained by the Constitution again.

Reforms to the EOP
The Executive Office of the President (EOP) has many councils that are to advise the President about how to form policy.  But it is not the job of the President to form policy but to implement and enforce the policies passed by the Congress.  To create policy as the President is to overreach his Constitutional powers as the chief law enforcement officer of the United States.  Congress makes policy, the President enforces it and the courts interpret it in accordance to the Constitution; it is call the separation of powers.

Also, the President has access to a vast supply of resources and advice from people all over the globe and here in the United States when he requires advice.  The following councils will be eliminated and may be replaced by a single advisor (if he so chooses to have such an advisor) appointed by the Present which would also requires Senate approval.  All "czars" or special advisers must also be eliminated as well, unless they be approved by Senate confirmation.  The only councils I would leave in the EOP would be the following and most would be consolidated into different executive departments.

National Security Council - This office would be left in place but joined together with the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Its job is to inform and advice the President on national security and foreign policy matters.  Since national security and defense is the job of the Department of Defense, it makes sense to consolidate this office within that department.

Office of Management and Budget - The job of this office is to help create the President's federal budget and assist in managing the other parts of the executive departments.  This part can stay but it must be staffed mostly by nonpolitical appointees.  This office serves a vital purpose in the government in the creation of the budget.

Intelligence Advisory Board - This office "provides advice to the President concerning the quality and adequacy of intelligence collection, of analysis and estimates, of counterintelligence, and of other intelligence activities."  Under this guise it would be consolidated with the department of defense along with the National Security Council.

White House Office - This office would be severely limited because it is their to serve the interests and needs of the President.  Their are a number of offices and agencies within it that I would also eliminate since they serve no constitutional purposes.  I know many will hate me for this but the Office of the First Lady would be one since she has not constitutional role to play in the government and its not the job of the people of the United States to pay for her staff.

In part two of this, series of articles, I will address the reforms that I would make to the overall structure of the Executive Departments, like the Department of Defense and State.

Questions?  Comments?  Concerns?  Class dismissed.

I'm Voting Republican Video

A couple months ago, prior to the election, I found this video.  Please take a look at the video if you have not seen it already to understand my response.

Its time to respond to the stupid, idiocy and ignorance of this video.

We don’t like shopping at small neighborhood stores. We don’t want the problem of choosing where to shop. And we just love cheap plastic crap from China.

No one forces you buy cheap goods from Walmart or any other store.  The fact of the matter is that Walmart provides hundreds, if not thousands, of jobs to hard working Americans.  They also provide goods to consumer citizens of lower income.  And they give over $400 million to charity each year.

I’m voting Republican because I don’t really want a cure for AIDS or for breast cancer.

Its not the job of the government to provide money for research.  Their are plenty of companies out their doing this research but it takes money.  These companies also deserve to make a profit for their research and development.

I’m voting Republican because I think new drugs should be made available immediately whether they’ve been tested properly or not. If the major pharmaceutical companies’ bottom lines are healthy, then I feel healthy too.

Drug testing is important but even if the FDA did not exist their would be consumer protections.  Its called civil law and tort lawsuits.  A drug company is not going to make a drug that kills potential customers because that hurts their bottom line.  Also they will test it because they know if it does something its not supposed to they will be sued by the users and cost them more money, which hurts their bottom line.

I’m voting Republican so that my little Caitlin can be in a classroom with at least 30 other children. That way she can be challenged by fighting for attention.

Thirty years ago our parents were in classrooms with that many kids and they honestly know more than our kids do now.

I’m voting Republican because women just can’t be trusted to make decisions about their own bodies. Never. Ever. Ever.

The choice to take away the life of another human being, especially an innocent child who had no choice in their creation, is not a right.  It's murder.

I’m voting Republican because I’ve already seen the great outdoors. Continuing our use of fossil fuels freely is far more important than preserving our natural wildlands.

Would you rather double or triple the amount we spend on gas and electricity because we have to buy oil from people who hate us or because the clean energy options are not cost effective?  Be my guest.  I will use the resources we have, until those cleaner sources are more efficient and cheaper.

We’re voting Republican because we like a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. We really like knowing that even if we’re separate, we’ll still be called equal.

Conservatives on the Supreme Court at least have a proper theory of understanding the Constitution.  They don't try and reinterpret it to mean what they want it to mean.  They don't try to change the Constitution through unconstitutional means.  It was the Republicans who freed the slaves, granted them equal and voting rights both in law and through Constitutional Amendments.  Racial segregation, Jim Crow laws and other racist policies were the product of the Democrats, not the Republicans.  It was the Republicans in Congress that passed the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960's, not the Democrats.  It was also a "conservative" court that overturned Plessy v. Furguson.

I’m voting Republican because I need to be told who I can love. I need the government to tell me. I need them to tell me how I can best show a lifetime commitment. And Republicans are just the folks to do that.

Most Republicans could not give a crap about who you love.  But I think we should pause before we give up thousands of years of tradition and take marriage (which has always been between a man and woman) and fundamentally change it.

I’m voting Republican because corporations should not have to pay to clean up environmental damage. The EPA is an outmoded idea. If people want clean water, buy it in a bottle.

The EPA, as part of the Executive Branch, is an enforcement agency, not a law making body.  When they expand regulations they are breaking the constitution that gives all law making power to Congress.

I’m voting Republican because I don’t want to know if the food I am eating has been genetically modified or exposed to radiation. I don’t want to have to live with that fear, you know? So if the label says it’s food, that’s good enough for me.

Studies have shown their is no problems with irradiated meat.  It would cut down on green house gasses since we could ship products in regular trucks.  Also, we have been genetically modifying our food for thousands of years, its called selective breeding.

I’m voting Republican because I really enjoy being screwed by the utility companies.

If utility companies were allowed to compete like other companies for business you wouldn't get screwed.  Right now with state ownership you are screwed because they have the monopoly.  They can raise rates and you the citizen have no recourse.

Because we need more minorities in prison.

Criminals go to prison not minorities. If their is a person who is in prison and they are a minority,  its not the because of Republicans, it because they are a criminal.

Because hybrid cars really suck.

They do.  No one buys them.  Even when you have the option between a gas car and the same car as a hybrid, people overwhelmingly choose the gas powered car.

Because I just don’t feel like I deserve health insurance.

Its your responsibility to provide it for yourself.  If you want health insurance, buy it, no one is stopping you.  Its not the job of the government or your job to provide it.

Because Texas needs more billionaires.

Texas can have as many billionaires as it wants.  They have a tax system that encourages the building of wealth.  That's why their economy is growing in this recession and people are moving their.

I’m voting Republican because sometimes the constitution is just one big inconvenient headache.

Both parties have had a habit in the last 100+ years of ignoring the Constitution.

I think the whole world should be run by one big corporation. I think it would be so much cozier.

If Republicans for corporations why did the Democrats in Congress bail out those evil banks and car companies that failed due to their own mismanagement?

Because all other countries are in fear to us. We should start as many wars as we need to keep it that way.

Countries should fear to attack us.  If other countries know that we will destroy them if they attack us, then they probably won't attack us.  I don't think we need to start wars, just end them when they decide to take a sucker punch at us.

So I can stay in Iraq... So I can go to Iran.

Iran and other nations are a threat to the world.  If you cannot recognize that then you are deaf, blind and dumb to the realities of the real world.  I am not suggesting we start a war, but we should be care of them.

Here's a different video that makes the statement of the other side.  If you want to know more about the statements made in this video check out the following the VerticleBlue website.  They explain every statement in the video with facts, because they are such stubborn things.