Pro Tea Party BS: Proposed 28th Amendment
Oct 4, 2013 15:41:35 GMT -8
Post by watchout on Oct 4, 2013 15:41:35 GMT -8
Someone posted this to KBOO's Facebook timeline. It doesn't have a great following(so far), but seems worthwhile to debunk it since KBOO's abdicated any journalistic standards:
Being fair it's not an official KBOO post, but anyone who gives a fuck about informing people would express skepticism and ask if this is something non-Tea Partiers are invested in. Like, say, Snopes:
www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp
It's not a complete hoax, it's a mix but looks mostly sketchy:
Let the Internet browser beware...
Deinna Wignerposted toKBOO Community Radio
3 hours ago ·
28th Amendment
Take back America
CARE EXPLAINED
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States”.
The 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Congress may collect no revenue by any means other than a flat individual income tax not to exceed 15% of an individuals earnings, a flat corporate tax not to exceed 10% of net revenues, and actual user fees for services. All citizens and businesses shall be taxed at the same rate, and no exceptions, exemptions or credits will be allowed.
Any budget passed by the Congress must be funded by actual revenues collected through taxes as described above. Except in time of War as defined below, no deficit spending, borrowing on future funds, borrowing from other entities or other mechanism to meet budget requirements will be allowed.
For purposes of this section, “War” shall be defined as hostilities declared by the President of the United States in his Constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, and duly authorized by the Congress under the terms of the “War Powers Act” of 1973. Any funds borrowed shall be used exclusively for executing that War and shall be re-paid entirely no later than 15 years from the end of the War.
All agencies, programs, entitlements and other devices that will be excised by budgetary requirements will be returned to the responsibility of the individual States. No federal regulations or legislation will dictate how the States fund or execute such devices.
The Congress may not make State eligibility for redistribution of revenue contingent on compliance with regulations or legislation that has the effect of a nationally uniform standard.
Those areas of federal responsibility prescribed by the original Constitution will have budgetary priority. No bill will be passed that funds any other concern without first meeting the budgetary requirements of these areas. No funding will be included in the budget for a concern that is the responsibility of and reserved to the States.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution is hereby amended to read as follows: “To regulate commerce with foreign nations and with the Indian tribes”
Finally some sense is being brought forward by the people of the United States to address our out of control government.
Our country started this slide downhill when it was decided somewhere that the government was responsible for protecting us from ourselves! The Constitution was put in place to protect us from our government! What happened to the freedom of choice, the freedom to live life free from tyranny, the freedom to pursue happiness, the right to privacy?
Our government just created history by passing a massive health bill that over 70% of people do not want! Why? Because we have legislators that believe it is the responsibility of government to take care of everything, We have too many illegal immigrants in our country, we have unions and lobbyists paying for legislators and because the government wants to be able to tell you what to eat, what to learn, what to drive, how to work and what to think.
Control
We are over regulated, over taxed and overwhelmed by the choices our legislators make and put into law and they are not affected by those laws! Our legislators are in the business of lining their pockets, living the high life and retiring rich men and women with free health care and pensions for life! All the time they are not paying into social security, not paying taxes and telling us we have to pay for the illegal immigrants and poor that are paid to have children and not to work while they themselves are exempt! While they continually vote themselves raises in one of the worst times since the Great Depression!
Because they lack real leadership! They lack the leadership to address illegal immigration and our borders; they lack the leadership to require anyone receiving government assistance to be drug tested, they lack the leadership to declare English the official language of the United States, they lack the leadership to keep jobs here! We must pay? isn’t it time they did too!
let’s take back America! Vote out all incumbents and let’s get some new legislators that are not in the business of government! I do not believe in term limits and I am glad the Tea Party Movement has been so strong. It’s time people woke up and realized what government is doing and make a choice to vote! Vote them out! Make a difference! don’t vote for any candidate that does not support these ideals.
Send this website to all your friends and get them to send it to their friends! The idea is to push our legislators into creating and passing the 28th amendment for the welfare of the Unites States of America! Write your Senators and Congressman and let them know you support these ideals. Ask them to support them too. www.usa28thamendment.com/
3 hours ago ·
28th Amendment
Take back America
CARE EXPLAINED
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States”.
The 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Congress may collect no revenue by any means other than a flat individual income tax not to exceed 15% of an individuals earnings, a flat corporate tax not to exceed 10% of net revenues, and actual user fees for services. All citizens and businesses shall be taxed at the same rate, and no exceptions, exemptions or credits will be allowed.
Any budget passed by the Congress must be funded by actual revenues collected through taxes as described above. Except in time of War as defined below, no deficit spending, borrowing on future funds, borrowing from other entities or other mechanism to meet budget requirements will be allowed.
For purposes of this section, “War” shall be defined as hostilities declared by the President of the United States in his Constitutional role as Commander-in-Chief, and duly authorized by the Congress under the terms of the “War Powers Act” of 1973. Any funds borrowed shall be used exclusively for executing that War and shall be re-paid entirely no later than 15 years from the end of the War.
All agencies, programs, entitlements and other devices that will be excised by budgetary requirements will be returned to the responsibility of the individual States. No federal regulations or legislation will dictate how the States fund or execute such devices.
The Congress may not make State eligibility for redistribution of revenue contingent on compliance with regulations or legislation that has the effect of a nationally uniform standard.
Those areas of federal responsibility prescribed by the original Constitution will have budgetary priority. No bill will be passed that funds any other concern without first meeting the budgetary requirements of these areas. No funding will be included in the budget for a concern that is the responsibility of and reserved to the States.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution is hereby amended to read as follows: “To regulate commerce with foreign nations and with the Indian tribes”
Finally some sense is being brought forward by the people of the United States to address our out of control government.
Our country started this slide downhill when it was decided somewhere that the government was responsible for protecting us from ourselves! The Constitution was put in place to protect us from our government! What happened to the freedom of choice, the freedom to live life free from tyranny, the freedom to pursue happiness, the right to privacy?
Our government just created history by passing a massive health bill that over 70% of people do not want! Why? Because we have legislators that believe it is the responsibility of government to take care of everything, We have too many illegal immigrants in our country, we have unions and lobbyists paying for legislators and because the government wants to be able to tell you what to eat, what to learn, what to drive, how to work and what to think.
Control
We are over regulated, over taxed and overwhelmed by the choices our legislators make and put into law and they are not affected by those laws! Our legislators are in the business of lining their pockets, living the high life and retiring rich men and women with free health care and pensions for life! All the time they are not paying into social security, not paying taxes and telling us we have to pay for the illegal immigrants and poor that are paid to have children and not to work while they themselves are exempt! While they continually vote themselves raises in one of the worst times since the Great Depression!
Because they lack real leadership! They lack the leadership to address illegal immigration and our borders; they lack the leadership to require anyone receiving government assistance to be drug tested, they lack the leadership to declare English the official language of the United States, they lack the leadership to keep jobs here! We must pay? isn’t it time they did too!
let’s take back America! Vote out all incumbents and let’s get some new legislators that are not in the business of government! I do not believe in term limits and I am glad the Tea Party Movement has been so strong. It’s time people woke up and realized what government is doing and make a choice to vote! Vote them out! Make a difference! don’t vote for any candidate that does not support these ideals.
Send this website to all your friends and get them to send it to their friends! The idea is to push our legislators into creating and passing the 28th amendment for the welfare of the Unites States of America! Write your Senators and Congressman and let them know you support these ideals. Ask them to support them too. www.usa28thamendment.com/
Being fair it's not an official KBOO post, but anyone who gives a fuck about informing people would express skepticism and ask if this is something non-Tea Partiers are invested in. Like, say, Snopes:
www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp
It's not a complete hoax, it's a mix but looks mostly sketchy:
Origins: The "proposed 28th Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution outlined above (sometimes circulated in modified form as the "Congressional Reform Act of 2011") suggests that all laws made by Congress applying to citizens of the United States apply equally to members of Congress themselves (a sentiment which is commonly expressed by critics of health reform efforts). Although this item could be said to have no real "true" or "false" quality to it (since what it referenced was just a hypothetical proposal and not a real piece of legislation), all of the supporting arguments accompanying it are false, and the answers to common questions asked about it are all nearly all negative:
Is this [text] the actual 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
No. The U.S. Constitution has only 27 amendments, the last of which (a limit on Congressional pay increases) was ratified in 1992.
Is this [text] really the proposed 28th Amendment?
This item is a "proposed 28th amendment" in the very loose sense that any change to the U.S. Constitution suggested since the ratification of the 27th Amendment is a "proposed 28th Amendment." However, when this piece hit the Internet back in 2009 it was just a bit of Internet-based politicking, not something that had been introduced or proposed as a potential amendment by any current member of Congress.
In August 2013, nearly four years after this item began making the rounds on the Internet, two Congressmen (Ron DeSantis of Florida and Matt Salmon of Arizona) did introduce a joint resolution (H.J.RES.55) similar to the first example shown above, proposing an amendment to the Constitution stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting the citizens of the United States that does not also apply to the Senators and Representatives." That bill will almost certainly die in committee, and it is exceedingly unlikely that any such broadly worded amendment could ever pass muster in Congress without the underlying idea being subject to a good many qualifications.
Could this amendment be passed without Congress voting on it?
Yes and no. Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution specifies two procedures for amendments. One method is for two-thirds of states legislatures to call for a constitutional convention at which new amendments may be proposed, subject to ratification by three-fourths of the states. The constitutional convention method allows for the Constitution to be amended by the actions of states alone and cuts Congress out of the equation — no Congressional vote or approval is required. However, not once in the history of the United States have the states ever called a convention for the purpose of proposing new constitutional amendments.
The other method for amending the Constitution (the one employed with every amendment so far proposed or enacted) requires that the proposed amendment be approved by both houses of Congress (i.e., the Senate and the House of Representatives) by a two-thirds majority in each, and then ratified by three-fourths of the states. It's probably safe to speculate that the odds that a supermajority of both houses of Congress would pass an amendment which placed such restrictions upon them are very low indeed.
Can members of Congress retire with full pay after serving only a single term?
No. This is a long-standing erroneous rumor which we cover in a separate article.
Are members of Congress exempt from paying into Social Security?
No. As noted in our article about Congressional pensions, although Congress initially participated in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) rather than Social Security, since 1984 all members of Congress have been required to pay into the Social Security fund.
Are members of Congress exempt from prosecution for sexual harassment?
No. The passage of Public Law 104-1 (the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, also known as CAA) made a variety of laws related to civil rights and workplace regulations applicable to the legislative branch of the federal government. Section 1311(a) of the CAA specifically prohibits sexual harassment (as well as harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin).
Are members of Congress exempt from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act health care legislation?
No. One of the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly known as "Obamacare") passed by Congress is a requirement that lawmakers give up the insurance coverage previously provided to them through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and instead purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created:
(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.
(i) REQUIREMENT — Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are:
(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or
(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).
An August 2013 ruling by the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was widely and inaccurately reported as exempting members of Congress from the requirement that they give up their Federal Employees Health Benefits Program coverage and instead purchase health insurance through online exchanges. That reporting was incorrect: Lawmakers are still required to purchase health insurance through government-created exchanges; what the OPM's ruling actually declared was that members of Congress and their staffs did not have to give up the federal subsidies covering part of the costs of their insurance premiums which they had previously been receiving (and which are afforded to millions of other federal workers).
Variations: An October 2011 variant of this item is prefaced by a statement made by Warren Buffett: "'I could end the deficit in 5 minutes. You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible
for re-election.'" This quote came from a 7 July 2011 CNBC interview in which the Oracle of Omaha addressed the then-current issue of raising the debt limit. The rest of the e-mail, however, has nothing to do with Warren Buffett.
Some versions of this item include a statement asserting that the children and staffers of U.S. Congressmen are exempt from paying back student loan obligations. That statement is false.
Later versions of this item have been prefaced with the statement that "Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention." It actually takes only 34 states to convene such a convention.
Last updated: 2 October 2013
Is this [text] the actual 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?
No. The U.S. Constitution has only 27 amendments, the last of which (a limit on Congressional pay increases) was ratified in 1992.
Is this [text] really the proposed 28th Amendment?
This item is a "proposed 28th amendment" in the very loose sense that any change to the U.S. Constitution suggested since the ratification of the 27th Amendment is a "proposed 28th Amendment." However, when this piece hit the Internet back in 2009 it was just a bit of Internet-based politicking, not something that had been introduced or proposed as a potential amendment by any current member of Congress.
In August 2013, nearly four years after this item began making the rounds on the Internet, two Congressmen (Ron DeSantis of Florida and Matt Salmon of Arizona) did introduce a joint resolution (H.J.RES.55) similar to the first example shown above, proposing an amendment to the Constitution stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting the citizens of the United States that does not also apply to the Senators and Representatives." That bill will almost certainly die in committee, and it is exceedingly unlikely that any such broadly worded amendment could ever pass muster in Congress without the underlying idea being subject to a good many qualifications.
Could this amendment be passed without Congress voting on it?
Yes and no. Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution specifies two procedures for amendments. One method is for two-thirds of states legislatures to call for a constitutional convention at which new amendments may be proposed, subject to ratification by three-fourths of the states. The constitutional convention method allows for the Constitution to be amended by the actions of states alone and cuts Congress out of the equation — no Congressional vote or approval is required. However, not once in the history of the United States have the states ever called a convention for the purpose of proposing new constitutional amendments.
The other method for amending the Constitution (the one employed with every amendment so far proposed or enacted) requires that the proposed amendment be approved by both houses of Congress (i.e., the Senate and the House of Representatives) by a two-thirds majority in each, and then ratified by three-fourths of the states. It's probably safe to speculate that the odds that a supermajority of both houses of Congress would pass an amendment which placed such restrictions upon them are very low indeed.
Can members of Congress retire with full pay after serving only a single term?
No. This is a long-standing erroneous rumor which we cover in a separate article.
Are members of Congress exempt from paying into Social Security?
No. As noted in our article about Congressional pensions, although Congress initially participated in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) rather than Social Security, since 1984 all members of Congress have been required to pay into the Social Security fund.
Are members of Congress exempt from prosecution for sexual harassment?
No. The passage of Public Law 104-1 (the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, also known as CAA) made a variety of laws related to civil rights and workplace regulations applicable to the legislative branch of the federal government. Section 1311(a) of the CAA specifically prohibits sexual harassment (as well as harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin).
Are members of Congress exempt from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act health care legislation?
No. One of the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly known as "Obamacare") passed by Congress is a requirement that lawmakers give up the insurance coverage previously provided to them through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and instead purchase health insurance through the online exchanges that the law created:
(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.
(i) REQUIREMENT — Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are:
(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or
(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).
An August 2013 ruling by the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was widely and inaccurately reported as exempting members of Congress from the requirement that they give up their Federal Employees Health Benefits Program coverage and instead purchase health insurance through online exchanges. That reporting was incorrect: Lawmakers are still required to purchase health insurance through government-created exchanges; what the OPM's ruling actually declared was that members of Congress and their staffs did not have to give up the federal subsidies covering part of the costs of their insurance premiums which they had previously been receiving (and which are afforded to millions of other federal workers).
Variations: An October 2011 variant of this item is prefaced by a statement made by Warren Buffett: "'I could end the deficit in 5 minutes. You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible
for re-election.'" This quote came from a 7 July 2011 CNBC interview in which the Oracle of Omaha addressed the then-current issue of raising the debt limit. The rest of the e-mail, however, has nothing to do with Warren Buffett.
Some versions of this item include a statement asserting that the children and staffers of U.S. Congressmen are exempt from paying back student loan obligations. That statement is false.
Later versions of this item have been prefaced with the statement that "Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention." It actually takes only 34 states to convene such a convention.
Last updated: 2 October 2013
Let the Internet browser beware...