ILNews

Senate president calling for constitutional convention to protect states’ rights

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Declaring that states’ rights are being trampled and the 10th Amendment is in shambles, the leader of the Indiana Senate is calling for a “gathering of states” to amend the U.S. Constitution.

Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore David Long, R-Fort Wayne, announced his intention to push for states to hold a constitutional convention at a press conference Thursday morning. He wants the states to come together to address placing limits on the commerce clause and on the federal taxing authority.

Tuesday, Feb. 19, before adjournment, Long plans to present the Senate Rules Committee with a joint resolution calling for an Article V Constitutional Convention. He also plans to offer two companion bills. The first bill will clarify how delegates are to be selected for the convention, and the second will place tight controls on the delegates to prevent a runaway convention.

“I think it’s the only way states’ rights can be protected in his country,” Long said, adding this effort is not rooted in conspiracy theories about the federal government wielding too much power. “It is, I think, a thoughtful and constitutionally based approach to how we can protect states’ rights… .”

In explaining that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution can be offered either by the Congress or by the states, Long pointed to James Madison. The founding father, he said, advocated specifically for language to be included in the Constitution that gave states the ability to draft and put forth amendments on their own.

The Senate president said Madison “clearly believes” this was the “single most important tool” states have to control the federal government.

States need to take charge, Long asserted, because Congress is paralyzed and seemingly has no ability to address the debt crisis facing this country.
 
The Indiana legislator is confident his resolution and two bills will pass this session, noting colleagues on both sides of the aisle have expressed concern about federal spending and states’ rights. Then, he said, he wants to spread the idea, like Johnny Appleseed, to other states.

Most recently Long said he has had conversations about this topic with leaders in Tennessee and Texas. Other states have been talking about this and wondering how to push back against Congress to get control particularly of spending.

“This is something that needs to start,” Long said. “We think the ball needs to get started rolling right here so we’ll do it.”

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT