Our Amendment XXVIII
SECTION 1
During the passage of a bill, the executive or either legislative branch is able to call a congressional conference if both legislative branches face gridlock which is characterized through ninety per cent of both parties having opposite votes for the bill. The executive can mandate a conference after four months of political gridlock or after ten rejections of any kind from each side. The legislative branches still hold the power to request conferences. In addition, either side can call a conference after three months of gridlock and eight rejections of any kind from each side.
SECTION 2.
When this mandated conference is called, the resulting committee will only be made up of the executive and the majority and minority party leaders of the House and Senate. A four-fifths vote is required for the bill and it will be passed into law.
This is cool, I can see the inspiration for this in today's politics. But after reading Levinson's "Our Imbecilic Constitution" I wonder if an amendment like this is absolutely necessary. I would argue that it is, and that the relative infrequency of government shutdowns is negligible here.
ReplyDeleteThis amendment is very interesting; however, I feel it is a bit impractical. For one, if a gridlock ever occurred, where 90% of parties had opposing views, it is almost safe to assume the majority and minority party leaders of the House and Senate will vote with their corresponding party at the mandated conference. This would create a two-two split vote for the President to break however he/she pleases. This amendment would essentially serve as another way to avoid a bipartisan solution and would also allow a party that controlled any two of the three areas of importance (House, Senate, or President) to eventually pass any sort of legislature they pleased.
ReplyDelete