4. The Super-push Amendment

.... In our previous posting we discussed the drawbacks of the 17^th amendment: that U.S. Senators no longer represented states as entities at the federal level, so that State rights have suffered a setback and the balance of powers has been disturbed. Since then, the federal government has been dumping unfunded mandates on the states, which now have an inadequate voice in expressing or defending their vital interests.

.

.... It is time for another amendment that will remedy this situation in a fair manner, as well as ending the insanity of excessive partisanship which often victimizes both states and citizens. This amendment must arise through the state legislatures themselves as discussed previously. Basically, it would contain three parts and would state something like this:

 

If legislation is introduced by any member of Congress or the Senate, and it is blocked from a full floor vote by any committee, leader, etc, by any method for more than ninety days; the state legislatures, by a sixty percent super majority, may issue a 'super-push' order to force both houses to vote over the legislation, as originally written, within thirty additional days, no other procedure, consideration or resort withstanding.

Should the Federal government pass legislation to which the state governments object, the state legislatures shall have the power to SuperVeto that legislation, or any part to which they are opposed (line item veto), by a sixty percent super majority within a reasonable amount of time.

Furthermore, should the President veto any legislation, and the US House and Senate fail to override that veto, or to try, the state legislatures may attempt to SuperOverride that veto, or any part of it, by a sixty percent super majority within a reasonable amount of time.

In either case, the SuperVeto or the SuperOverride would mark the end of the legislation being addressed.

.... This amendment envisions a 60% majority rather than a two-thirds majority, first, to make it more realistic, since the states currently have no mechanism in place to coordinate such an effort (this will eventually change). But more importantly, the states will not regain a voice to author legislation, only to respond, so their voice in this regard should be a little louder to compensate.

.

.... This amendment would force the federal government to work more closely with the states in protecting their interests, and would restore a balance of power between them. Unfunded mandates would be defeated by state coalitions, forcing both the federal and state governments to earnestly consider their proper jurisdictions. It would also give the people another avenue of resort in case the President and/or the Congress became unresponsive to the will of the people, as in the recent health care debates.

.

.... In time, committees in each statehouse would be formed to monitor federal activities and coordinate a response with the other states. Through this amendment, the federal government would be more accountable to the states in a way that reflected the original intention of our founding fathers, nevertheless senators would still be elected by the general populous. This would retain the advantage of the 17th Amendment while compensating for its drawback.