Abbott's Nine Amendments

Texas is a prime example of the state constitutions in general. Ever since the integration

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 was held to address problems in governing the United States which had been operating under the Articles of Confederation since it’s independence from Britain. Fifty-five delegates from the states attended the convention to address these issues. The delegates consisted of federalists who wanted a strong central government to maintain order and were mainly wealthier merchants and plantation owners and anti-federalists who were farmers, tradesmen and local politicians who feared losing their power and believed more power should be given to the states. The Constitutional Convention dealt with the issue of the debate between federalists and anti-federalists. The debates, arguments and compromises

We can conclude that in order to amend the Texas constitution a proposal must be initiated during a regular session or special session of the legislator. In addition, a unanimous two-thirds vote must be achieved before an election can be held for the people to vote on the amendment. Although citizens voiced their concerns for reform of the constitution during the 1970’s only one reform attempt resulted in an opportunity for the electorate to vote. In the end the constitutional reform did not succeed because of shady tactics, specific individuals, and fear of change. The recent Supreme Court Ruling on gay marriages is an example of why the Texas constitution is to constrict and non-free flowing. Due to the fact that it is so detailed they would not of had the ability to allow gay marriages to be legal without a specific

The Texas Constitution and the US

First, the strengths need to be acknowledged; Texas has always been about their own freedom and their own individuality and the constitution reflects that. The constitution establishes rights such as “freedom of speech, press, and assembly” (Collier et al 62). This is great because it provides a sense of security for the

In 1836, the new Texas Constitution was written during the war for independence which had a separation of governmental powers, a bill of rights, a bicameral legislature. This had many adopted aspects from the Spanish and Mexican laws. In 1845, was modeled after other southern states and therefore referred to as the Statehood Constitution (Newell, 44). It embraced democratic principles and was influenced by Jacksonian democracy. In 1861, the Constitution was modified when Texas joined the Confederate States of America, this was called The Civil War Constitution. This is when Texas seceded to join the confederacy. In 1866, was on the losing side of the war and Texas was ordered by Andrew Jackson to revise the document. This new document abolished slavery and declared secession illegal. In 1869, reconstruction of the Constitution happened yet again because radical reconstructionists in Washington wanted southern states to write new constitutions with tougher standards. The present constitution the document was careful about what government could do and couldn’t do. This document has changed a bit and has had over 467 revisions but it is still the document that is used present day.

In his book, “The Liberty Amendments” Mark Levin argues well on how the slow creep of federal power in the United States has slowly disenfranchised the local government under the guise of propagating and deifying a ‘national government approved’ form of democracy. The people received a message of nationalism, and personal power while at the same time receiving a watered down version of what the founding fathers had originally intended.

Every year, Congress proposes a ton of amendments. Some are reasonable, and some of them are just crazy. The rate of proposed amendments throughout the 1990s is absurd. This roller coaster of a rate went all the way up from 214 in 1990 to only 60 proposes amendments in 1999. So far in the beginning of the 21st century, the country stays steady in the proposing department at around the 70-80 rang according to senate.gov. Needless to say, in 1789, the people proposed 10,431 amendments. But, of course, these insane numbers doesn’t necessary mean anything if they are not passed.

The Texas constitution is very long and detailed. The Texas constitution is long and detailed because of provisions that specifically tells the government what they can or can’t do. Now with the Texas constitution the government does not have the option about interpreting it to their advantage or disadvantage. Instead any person with the power inside of the government, if they wish to act outside of laws stated in the Texas constitution must have to amend the constitution. Now for the United States constitution, it is very brief and broad which allows the government to interpret it any way they would like in a sense. By doing this they can claim their implied powers to meet any specific circumstances that must do with public policy. When it comes to civil liberties the United states constitution are listed as the bill of rights which are just amendments listed versus the Texas constitution which are also called bill of rights but are stated in the first

The constitution of the United States of America is the founding document on which the government of America is built. It currently has twenty-seven amendments. It lines out the specific government practices as well as the system of check and balances. It was first drafted July, 1787 after the first form of government, the articles of confederation, had proven very inefficient to a point where it became almost redundant to have them in place. After a large amount of debate the acting continental congress decide to completely revise the current system. The constitution was efficient and fair and it kept the parts of government in place while not giving too much power to one or more branches.

Texas calling on Congress to convene a convention of states to amend the U.S. Constitution and wrest power from the federal government. Abbott and other supporters of the effort contend that the states must rein in a federal government that has run amok. They want amendments that would restrict federal spending, limit federal power and enact term limits on federal officials and members of Congress.

As Texas State Gazette mentioned”No state can force another state either to remain in it or withdraw from it”; this was later supported by O.M Roberts, president of the Texas Secession Convention, when he said “the true theory of our national government as an associations of sovereignties not a mass of people in one social compact.” (document C). Each statement supports the fact that the united states should grant each state their own power. By doing this it gives people popular sovereignty, this means more individual freedom and a happier government. Texas felt the need to not have to follow a set of rules created by a federal system. The Union deprived Texas of this right because it wanted to stay in control, this ended up giving the Union Hitlerian aspects which incensed Texas.

The Texas Constitution was amended in 1993, during Governor William P. Clements’ second administration, to prohibit a state income tax. Therefore, any such proposal would have serious difficulties passing both chambers of the legislature and then it would be subject to ratification through a statewide referendum. Texas’ lack of a state income tax seems to have enhanced its economy vitality with this approach. It also lacks a corporate income tax, which is not prohibited by the Constitution. Texas is one of seven

There has been seven Texas Constitutions since 1827 including our current Constitution, which was established on 1876. Our current constitution has been amended hundreds of times because of its tight restrictions. The Legislative department is the dominant branch of the Texas Constitution it is subject to check and balances in the tripartite system. The Executive department limits the government’s power, and the judicial powers is divided into smaller courts. These three branches of the Texas are examples of how restricted and limited our constitution is.

The big issue of the contention at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 has how the states would be in the new Congress, represented. During this time, under the Articles Of Confederation, each state was, in Congress, given a single vote, which gave each state equal power. Since some states, however, like Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts had much larger populations than the other states, this system was not preferred by many. Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, with their much larger populations, were clearly in favor of this form of representation. And joining them in the fight were the Carolinas and Georgia, whose populations were not at the time very big yet, but their land areas were very sizable and also