Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Co-blogger Randy Barnett’s proposed Repeal Amendment has generated a great deal of controversy. The amendment would give a two thirds majority of the states the power to repeal any federal law or regulation. The idea has now been endorsed by a number of congressional Republicans, including soon-to-be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
Randy argues that the amendment could play a significant role in “deterring even further expansions of federal power.” Critics such as Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank claim that it would seriously undermine the Constitution or even “destroy” it.
I think that both sides’ claims are overstated. If enacted, the Repeal Amendment would have only minor effects because mobilizing 34 states (the number needed for a two-thirds majority) to oppose any congressional enactment is extremely difficult. Proponents of repeal would have to win not just 34 votes, but 67 or 68, since every state but Nebraska has a bicameral legislature. In some cases, the party that controls the state senate is not the same as the one that controls the lower house, which makes it difficult to get both to vote for the same repeal proposal.
As Randy himself points out, “[g]etting two-thirds of state legislatures to agree on overturning a federal law will not be easy and will only happen if a law is highly unpopular.” If it were that unpopular, it seems unlikely that the law would be enacted by both houses of Congress and the president in the first place. In practice, therefore, the Amendment’s effects would largely be limited to repealing a few old laws that no longer have significant political support. And even in those cases, assembling the required two-thirds majority will be difficult.
Generally, I’m not too charitable toward arguments that take the form “once it’s in, it ought to be in for good.” We have a lot of lavishly funded political movements lately — ObamaCare was one, but there are many others — that have something to do with a “deflowering” event. Say yes here, and it will never be possible to say no, ever again.
Rather like throwing a match into a drum of gasoline. Once it’s lit, there will be no way to extinguish it. In what way does this quality of “can’t ever extinguish it, ever, no matter what” serve the interests of a constitutionally representative republic?
And our democratic process does very little to persuade me that once The People have spoken, the matter should be settled forevermore. I live in California, where it seems just yesterday our union apparatus was clamoring from the rooftops that the recall effort must fail, should fail, and inevitably will fail…because Gray Davis, dang it, had just been re-elected as our governor. The people obviously wanted him! Well, that’s not the way things shook out.
Sometimes…a lot of the time, in fact…there is an advantage to be had from asking “okay one last time: Are you sure you really want this?” That’s what responsible people do with the important decisions they make in their personal lives, and I don’t see why they should be prohibited from doing the same thing in the voting booth, through their state representation.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
[…] Eratosthenes on a repeal amendment. Silly him, doesn’t he realize that ‘progress’ is a one-way ratchet? […]
- Facts And Science And Argument « Rhymes With Cars & Girls | 12/22/2010 @ 09:18