Diary

Amendments? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Amendments!

It seems that, every time statists control the legislative agenda and (true to form) spend money we don’t have on things we don’t need, the faithful in the Stupid Party troop out their favorite hobby horse—the Constitutional amendment.  Whether it’s the Balanced Budget or Term Limits, the sheer impracticality of ever getting an amendment passed is exceeded only by what I believe to be the true failing of such efforts—dereliction of civic duty.  While the gentlemen and women of the Stupid Party are at least kind to this crotchety conservative when this opinion is expressed, but the end result is the preservation of the status quo.

First, let me dispense with the nonsense of a balanced budget amendment.  Not only is the most likely outcome of such an  amendment nothing more than a fine balance of excess spending and excess taxation, but it is entirely unnecessary if representatives with a healthy respect for the Constitution are elected.

Which brings me to term limits.  Whenever I hear someone bring up this political nostrum, my response is: “What, two years is too long?”  There is not an officeholder at any level of government whose term is not open to being limited by every election.  All that is necessary is for an informed electorate to scrutinize the crop of candidates being slated by the parties, participate in the candidate elimination process of the party of their choice, and then be sure to get out and vote for their preference.  Hiding behind an amendment the fact that they are not exercising their right to perform their civic duty (which would be as open to judicial activism as is the rest of the Constitution) is an act of dereliction (as I said above).

Citizens—get off the couch, get in the game, and execute your duty!