The rule states: A bill or joint resolution may not be introduced unless the sponsor submitted … a statement citing as specifically as possible the power or powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the bill or joint resolution.
The rule was scoffed at by critics who said it would have no measurable impact on bills being presented for consideration by members of the House. Attorney Sandy Levinson, for example, observed sardonically, “No lawyer takes this seriously. As any lawyer would know, it is not hard to come up with a constitutional justification for anything you want to do.”
Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah), supported by the Tea Party, was skeptical as well:
The extent to which [the Authority Statements] turn out to be helpful will turn on how much actual analysis takes place, because there are ways of taking the Commerce Clause and making it apply to everything. That’s not new. If that’s all that happens, then this isn’t going to do much. A study of the recently released numbers from the Republican Study Committee (RSC) looked at every one of the 3,865 “Constitutional Authority Statements” presented by members of the 112th Congress through January 5, 2012 [and] has concluded that Rule XII has been ignored in nearly all cases:
- 3 bills cite only the Preamble to the Constitution
- 109 bills cite only Article I (which creates the legislative branch)
- 617 bills cite only Article I, Section 8 (which contains the list of specifically enumerated powers) without citing any specific clause
- 732 bills cite the “commerce clause”
- 321 bills cite the “necessary and proper” clause without citing any of the powers granted in that clause
- 351 bills cite at least two of the “general welfare,” the “commerce,” or the “necessary and proper” clauses
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/10596-constitutional-authority-house-rule-xii-largely-ignored
No comments:
Post a Comment