On Friday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott took a strong stance for liberty, by introducing a plan to return power to the people and states, not through armed rebellion — but by using the Constitution to essentially save the Constitution.
Abbott’s plan, called Restoring the Rule of Law with States Leading the Way, issues a call for an Article V convention of states to propose new amendments to the Constitution that would devolve much of the federal government’s power back to states, where the founding fathers intended it to be.
The Constitution, under Article V, describes two ways in which amendments to the nation’s founding document can be added. One way has been used 17 times to add amendments to the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution: A two-thirds majority of both chambers of Congress proposed new amendments and then sent them to the states, where the required three-fourths of them approved, or ratified, the amendments, putting them in force.
But the second way — the process called for by Abbott and other freedom-minded lawmakers in the states and in Congress — has never been used. It involves having two-thirds of states petition Congress to call a convention for the express purpose of delegates from the participating jurisdictions coming together and proposing amendments, which would also then have to be approved by three-fourths of all states.
Less government = more liberty
Abbott and supporters of the Convention of the States project have concluded that Congress and law-skirting presidents will never “reform” themselves, so states must take matters into their own hands through this constitutional amendment process and impose their own solutions. A sample proposal for how a convention would work can be found here.
Among Abbott’s proposals are:
— An amendment requiring future congresses and presidents to pass balanced budgets so they stop adding to the massive federal debt now at more than $18 trillion, which has doubled under the Obama presidency;
— An amendment giving states power to override U.S. Supreme Court decision if two-thirds vote to do so, thereby giving states — finally — a means of combating a politicized, life-tenured high court in which often just five people impose rules on all 310 million Americans;
— An amendment that would prohibit the federal Congress from interfering with or regulating activities that take place solely in that state (such as open carry for firearms anywhere, recognizing only traditional marriage, legalizing marijuana etc.);
— An amendment requiring a seven-justice super-majority for the Supreme Court to overturn a state law — and more. Read the full proposal here.
“The Constitution is increasingly eroded with each passing year. That is a tragedy given the volume of blood spilled by patriots to win our country’s freedom and repeatedly defend it over the last 240 years,” begins an executive summary of Abbott’s proposal. “Moreover, the declining relevance of our Nation’s governing legal document is dangerous. Thomas Hobbes’s observation more than 350 years ago remains applicable today: the only thing that separates a nation from anarchy is its collective willingness to know and obey the law.”
What would you do with health freedom?
As you read through Abbott’s proposals — and his are just a few amendments and proposals that would be offered should an Article V convention be called (34 states need to petition Congress for that to happen) — imagine one day being given back your freedom to choose any health option you deem best for yourself, without being forced by the state or federal government to, say, take a flu shot or other immunizations; to be forced to subject your child to burning radiation therapy, dangerous surgery or poisonous chemotherapy for cancer treatment; and so forth. What would that be like?
“What’s missing from [Abbott’s] list that needs to be in the U.S. Constitution? A health freedom amendment that protects the rights of citizens to be free from coercive medical interventions (forced chemotherapy and vaccinations) and to be able to choose the health practitioner of their choice, especially if that person is a holistic, alternative or naturopathic practitioner.
“The treatment of cancer patients with pioneering, advanced medicine treatments need to be decriminalized. (Right now, healing cancer patients is a crime in America.) And the licensing monopolies of the state medical boards needs to be shattered.”
Can you imagine?
This is the ticket to the restoration of our constitutional liberties, as Abbott, Adams and others have noted.
And don’t forget, before Barack Obama pushed for a federal takeover of health care, Hillary Clinton, the Democrats’ leading presidential contender, tried to get “universal health care” passed, which was essentially Obamacare on steroids. If she becomes president, do you think she will help restore health freedom, or limit it even more?
Read Mike’s full column here, and let him know what you think.