Monday, August 6, 2012

Dismantling the Constitution, One Article at a Time

Hat tip to Arctic Patriot who posts a link to the shocking news that the House has passed a bill removing the teeth of article 2 of the constitution, which requires the Senate approve presidential nominees - the famous "advice and consent" clause often spoken of.  
By a vote of 261-116, the House of Representatives passed a bill rewriting Article II of the Constitution and divesting the Senate of the power to accept or reject the appointment of many presidential nominees.

Last year, the Senate passed the measure by a vote of 79-20, so it now goes to the desk of President Obama for his signature.
The president, dogged, determined defender of the constitution that he is, will surely veto this bill and refuse to allow the additional power to flow to the executive.   Bwahahahahahahahahahaha  ... hahahahahahaha .  Wew! ... Sorry.  Sometimes I crack myself up.

The article is dated last Friday, but says the bill was actually passed Tuesday.  The senate bill had been sitting for over a year.
Although the House vote occurred on Tuesday, the Senate voted to surrender its constitutional check on the executive over a year ago on June 29, 2011.
But don't worry.  They say they'll only give away their power to approve minor appointments, and still approve major appointments.  Just like they said income tax will never go above 1% and the Federal Reserve will protect the integrity of the currency. 


  1. I guess I'm pretty damn naive, but I thought it required a Constitutional amendment to change the Constitution. Am I wrong, or is this simply another illegal, unConstitutional move on the part of our elected "representatives"?

    Wasn't it in Shakespeare's Henry VI that a character says, "First thing, let's kill all the lawyers"? Since the only halfway decent legislators appear to all be doctors (Ron Paul, Paul Broun, and Tom Coburn), perhaps it is time to at least _consider_ following "Dick's" advice, at least as far as D.C. is concerned.

    1. RegT, I assume that the bill is Constitutional because the Constitution doesn't actually enumerate all positions that the Senate must advise about and consent to. The bill alters the enumerated list in Federal law.

  2. I don't know. 79 votes seems like pretty substantial consent to me. I'm actually not sure why this bill even required the House's input - the Senate could vote at any time to change its rules to automatically consent to any nominee.

  3. Old Will had it right:

    "Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators."
    - Will Rogers

    "There ought to be one day--just one--when there is open season on senators."
    - Will Rogers