“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate. “
“On the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States”
If thirty-eight States have a case of the hips regarding ObamaCare, and given that Congress is apparently in a mood to ram stuff down the throat of the electorate, it occurs to Your Humble Correspondent that it just might be time to return the favour.
Someone check my math, but isn’t thirty-eight just a bit more than the three-quarters of fifty States required to ram the next Amendment to the Constitution of the United States far enough up the Federal Government that they’d choke on the hair at the back of their throats?
So, how does:
“No person shall be mandated by law to purchase any goods or service, at any time”
sound for the 28th Amendment?
Or shall we go for the poetic justice route, and hoist them on their own petards by way of:
“Only excepting such limited protection as offered by Article One, Section Six, Congress is hereby prohibited from exempting its Members from each, any, and all effects, duties or obligations rendered upon any citizen, or citizens, by any Law, Tax, or other action passed by Congress.”
What do you think, Gentle Readers? Is it time to remind Congress who they work for by beating them firmly about the head and shoulders with a Constitutional amendment?