View Full Version : National Review Amendment??

Gumba of Liberty
07-04-2011, 12:58 PM
Should we be pushing a National Review Amendment that allows The People to call legislation into question with the gathering of 10% of the populations signature. So for instance, we could call into question the Patriot Act and have a nationwide vote to either keep or remove the Patriot Act. How powerful would it feel to have the ability to call the Federal Reserve Act into question and vote on it? The law would not allow the population to write new laws, only to repeal them. I think it would encourage the citizens to get active and remove laws that violate their Rights. Anyone on board?

My First Name Is Paul
07-04-2011, 01:28 PM
The better way to encourage participation is to reduce district sizes. With the average House district at 700,000 people, most do not feel there is any real way to influence their elected officials. What you are suggesting can be overturned by Congress just passing the law again. They know that the resources to overturn a law are huge, so they would have little to fear.

Gumba of Liberty
07-04-2011, 01:51 PM
If we passed the National Review Amendment, we could call in to question the Reapportionment Act of 1929 and return representation to 30,000 people per Representative. Could we not?

07-04-2011, 02:10 PM
I like the National Review amendment, it reminds me of Mike Gravel's National Ballot Initiative, where any American can write a law, and with enough signatures, it can be voted on in Congress. I say pair them together!

As far as district sizes, if representation was at 30,000 again, we'd have over 10,000 reps! Too many- I think the House should be increased to about 800-1000, and add one Senate seat to every state.

While we're at it, I say abolish the Electoral College and give Presidents only one six year term.

My First Name Is Paul
07-04-2011, 04:19 PM
At 1000, you still have 300,000 people per district. The advantage of 30,000 people per district is that running for office is something that anyone can do. This was supposed to the very function of the house. That anyone in any socioeconomic class can make a very serious run at office. At 300,000 the plutocracy is maintained.

To tell you the truth, I don't like it here in California where everyone is a legislator. It becomes all about timing of the initiative. Certain initiatives (including amendments) are basically guaranteed to pass if they are put on the ballot at the right time. This is because the special interests do an exception job at getting their people to vote at minimal cost, while a concerted and expensive campaign must be launched to fight the efforts.

Consider that right now we have had zero policy impact on the special interest controlled legislature. Adding in an additional opportunity for them to plunder means they will do it at a faster pace.

07-04-2011, 04:21 PM
I think a better way would be to allow the states to repeal legislation if 3/4 of the state legislatures agreed. that would be more practical than nationwide elections and gathering 30+million signatures.