Opinion by Roman Buhler
Editor’s Note: AmmoLand News has included this video from 2016, please excuse some legistlative points as they have changed with time.
USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- “If Congress Does Not Change Federal Gun Laws, Kamala Harris Promises, She Will Do It by Presidential Fiat”
That was the headline of a recent article in Reason magazine..
We don’t know when there will be another anti-2nd Amendment President, but we know that there will almost certainly be another one elected sometime in the coming years.
Such a President could catastrophically impact 2nd Amendment rights and decimate the American firearms industry, with a series of regulatory edicts dictated by un-elected Washington bureaucrats. No vote of Congress would be required.
We cannot defeat this threat simply by winning the next election. Winning an election can only delays the disaster for a few more years. To end the threat we must do more.
We must demand today that our elected officials support permanent curbs on the power of un-elected federal bureaucrats.
But we can’t settle for a law, even if we could get one passed in the current deadlocked Congress. A law passed by Congress to curb regulators, could be struck down in Court or repealed by a future Congress.
To permanently curb the administrative state, we must Constitutionally require that major new federal regulations be approved by Congress.
But Constitutional Amendments are difficult to enact, Congress isn’t about to propose a Constitutional Amendment on its own, and conservatives are deeply divided over the wisdom of convening a Convention to propose an Amendment.
The achievable solution may be an idea suggested by former Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese based on 200 years of American constitutional history: His idea: “Give the states the same power as Congress to propose a specific Amendment to the U.S. Constitution”,
It turns out that every time in American history that Congress has seen a strong majority of the public and 2/3 of the states in favor of a particular Amendment, Congress has acted.
12 of the 27 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, including the Bill of Rights and, most recently, presidential term limits were proposed by Congress under pressure from the states and the public.
Our challenge today is to revive the power of states and citizens to force Congress to propose an Amendment without a convention, that both 2/3 of the states and a majority of the public want.
The good news is that by a more than 2-1 margin voters favor an Amendment to require that major new federal regulations be approved by Congress!
And even better news is that 29 state legislative chambers in 18 out of the 34 states we need to get a 2/3 majority have already endorsed a simple Amendment called the “Regulation Freedom Amendment” that would require that Congress approve major new federal regulations.
The Amendment says:
“Whenever one quarter of the Members of the U.S. House or the U.S. Senate transmit to the President their written declaration of opposition to a proposed federal regulation, it shall require a majority vote of the House and Senate to adopt that regulation.”
In other words, if one quarter of the U.S. House or Senate object to a proposed federal regulation, a majority of both Houses must vote to approve it.
The Regulation Freedom Amendment has been unanimously endorsed by the Republican National Commitee in a Resolution pre-approved by the White House.
Mike Pence was the first Governor to endorse the Regulation Freedom Amendment. Ted Cruz was the first Senator to endorse it. Georgia Senator David Perdue has offered to be a leader of this effort in the U.S. Senate.
Some of the many other endorsers include the American Farm Bureau, the National Taxpayers Union, the 2016 Republican National Platform, former NRA President David Keene and Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt.
Our goal is to make support for the Regulation Freedom Amendment virtually unanimous among those who want to be seen as supporters of curbing the Administrative State and preserving the regulatory reforms of this Administration.
Just as the “no tax increase” pledge re-defined the Republican brand almost 30 years ago, support for “Regulation Freedom Amendment” can define a new generation of elected officials who believe the people should have the final say over the rules that govern them.
You and concerned citizens you know can help advance this effort by asking any Republican elected official:
“Do you think that the rules that govern us should be dictated by un-elected Washington bureaucrats, or should the people have the final say?”
And when an elected official says, “Of course the people should have the final say” you can ask them the key question:
“What is your position on the Regulation Freedom Amendment, endorsed by the RNC with the approval of the White House and by conservatives like Ed Meese and Mike Pence, to require that major new federal regulations be approved by Congress?”
If they haven’t heard of it, you can send them a copy of this article, the below flyer and a link to our website www.RegulationFreedom.org
Regulation Freedom Amendment Flyer
They may tell you they have supported a proposed law called the REINS Act that was backed by every voting Republican House Member in the last Congress. The REINS Act would require that some new regulations be approved by Congress.
But the REINS Act is three fatal flaws.
- First, it could be challenged and overturned in Court.
- Second it could be repealed or waived by a future Congress.
- And Third, because it only applies to regulations with a cost of more than $50 million dollars, it may not apply to critical regulations that impact 2nd Amendment rights or religious freedom, and could easily be evaded by bureaucrats who propose regulations with a cost under the dollar cost threshold.
Support for temporary regulation reform that would leave 2nd Amendment rights and religious freedom unprotected should not be enough to satisfy citizens who want real permanent protection from overreaching federal bureaucrats.
So you should insist on getting an answer to the original question.
“What is your position on the Regulation Freedom Amendment that can not be challenged in court or repealed by a future Congress, and that fully protects 2nd Amendment rights and religious freedom?”
And if the answer is “I don’t know” you can ask that their office review the issue and let you know their position.
We believe that when offices of most Republicans do the research, they will conclude that the strong Republican and conservative support for the Regulation Freedom Amendment combined with a growing chorus of inquires from grassroots 2nd Amendment and other regulatory reform advocates will persuade those elected officials that it is to their benefit to join the list of those who support the Amendment.
As support for the Amendment grows among Republicans and even among some reasonable Democrats pressure will grow on more Democrats, especially those in swing districts to support the Amendment and demonstrate that they really do prefer “Democracy over Bureaucracy”.
The question “Should bureaucrats keep their power to rule by decree or should we give power back to elected representatives of the people” could be a decisive in the 2020 election, but only if there is a clear contrast for voters to see.
That is why your role can be critical in persuading elected officials to endorse the Amendment and to help make “End Regulation without Representation” a front burner issue for the American public.
Every elected official you help persuade to endorse the Amendment adds to the pressure for reform and makes this issue more visible.
In addition to building a grassroots team who will ask elected officials where they stand, we are also building a team of volunteer advocates willing attend meetings, conferences and conventions to spread the word about how we can take power out of Washington and return it to the people as the President promised to do in his inaugural address.
And we are also building a team of online advocates who will spread the Regulation Freedom Amendment message on social media.
If you would like to learn more or to get more involved in this effort in any way, please visit our website www.RegulationFreedom.org or email us at [email protected] and we will reply to you personally.
The left has demonstrated their desire to replace rule of law by consent of the governed with the tyranny of un-elected Washington bureaucrats.
That is our unpleasant future if we don’t act to prevent it.
Not only the 2nd Amendment rights, but our representative system of Constitutional government is at stake.
If you agree that the abusive power of the administrative state is a threat we can’t ignore, and that we must make curbing the authority of un-elected bureaucrats it a major issue in 2020, contact us today.
www.RegulationFreedom.Org
[email protected]
Thank you for your interest in the 2nd Amendment and in working save freedom in our nation for the next generation.
Roman Buhler is the National Director of the Madison Coalition. He served as Counsel to the Committee on House Administration of the U.S. House of Representatives for 14 years. He was Newt Gingrich’s first House Committee Counsel.
Mr. Katz,
It is well acknowledged that Marxists, Communists, etc., and a lot if not all radical left liberals /demorats function essentially and have core beliefs of the lack of God and any Divinity attached to human life and namely the American people under the Constitution via the Bill of Rights. So, in effect this
expresses itself as atheism and puts that “axiomatic” divine inspiration of the B of R’s and Constitution at a less advantageous, protected standing
Godsend that it is. What now?
Muslim takeover on every screen in America as introduction to the new government that Islam Don promised.
It is revealed that Operation Hammer conducted by Brennen provided info to Barry of which Barry used to blackmail Roberts on USSC. Roberts is just the first revealed, others were subject to same. Corrupt justices have destroyed the rights of Americans and is why 2A is supreme so it can’t be tampered with. Is why their unconstitutional gun laws are exactly that, unconstitutional. Like letting a thief hold your wallet for safe keeping or paying someone to protect something they intentionally keep in peril so you keep paying for protection. You been scammed! Lied to and ripped off! You don’t… Read more »
Attention Attention Attention! (Illinois gun owners need your help. The below bill is being fast tracked. We need gun groups like GOA and others to issue Alerts) A major gun control bill is moving in the Illinois General Assembly that will require ALL gun owners to be finger printed and background check in person at an Illinois State police post.at their expense. The bill as amended also “ENDS” all private sales and transfers. Please contact your family and friends in Illinois and ask them to contact their Illinois State Senator and House member and tell them to oppose SB1966 as… Read more »
And suddenly you’re panicked? After they sold you the right through permit purchases and so forth? Criminally extorted you for about 70 years and now you’re panicked? Quick call the corporate tyrant to be saved? Same corporate tyrant that demands you pay for rights? Trump preparing to hand off Oval Office to Hillary and you’re worried about your gun rights that you gave away many years ago? Police confiscate your firearm if you use it and suddenly you’re concerned over more fake gun laws? By all means go to EMERGENCY STATUS on the very last day of USA. This is… Read more »
When the rule of law changes at the whim of each tyrant (criminal) depending on which way the wind is blowing you do not have a country but rather tyranny. Has reached the point of tyranny now that 92% of those elected officials openly declare war on citizens chomping at the bit to kill us. Murder of citizens now a political campaign to see who wins. Genocide 2020!
An Article V Convention of States is half way to being called. 14 states have passed Article V resolutions. This is the second and best way to reign in a Government full of Elites who wont reform themselves. Join the movement endorsed by the likes of Antonin Scalia, Tom Coburn, Mark Levin, Jim DeMint to name a few
Taxachusetts would be more than happy to strip away 2A rights. They come closer each year after a liberal judge said our own state constitution has no meaning in this respect.
I am a 2nd amendment supporter and Legal gun owner.Sadly I feel our country has turned communist and our Constitution,Our Bill of Rights and our Freedoms are lost to the socialistic communist ideals of the DEMARATS AND THE LEFT. No matter what we say at the voting places our voice gets drowned out by the non thinking spoon fed leftist libitards.Their ultamit goal turn America into a North Korea, Iran and Venezuela ,just to name a few. All communist dictatorships where the people have no voice.Again these spoon feed leftist are indroctanated into believing the CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS… Read more »
The only way the 2nd Amendment is going to be defended by the population is by civil war on those that are either brain washed by liberal colleges or just plain stupid. The Socialists are never going to stop until they have been removed or controlled.
Every politician not actively trying to repeal 1934, 1968, and 1986 are anti-2A.
Anti-Constitutionalist’s=Anti-Americans=Enemies of the United States…
This proposed amendment won’t get passed and it shouldn’t. This article conveniently foregoes an explanation of executive regulatory power. The executive can only pass regulations that Congress has empowered them to do, per the delegation doctrine. A simple way to change any particulr one is to undelegate that power per legislation. Aside from the executive having the legal authority, this amendment wont get passed because of the low bar. If all you need is a quarter of each chamber of Congress to challenge a regulation, then the opposition would be challenging every single bit of regulation that came put of… Read more »
It’s NOT a bad idea to slow down our government. The less work they do, the better off “We the People” are.
This author like too many others, assumes that through either legislation of the courts we can correct the wrongs that have been done. That is not going to happen. We are beyond the point I believe our founding fathers would have taken up arms. It is time to start to raise militias. I’ve been approached by number of radio hams in my area wish to form a militia. I will meet with them but my terms are going to be rather stringent. I’m not interested in grabbing a hundred guys together. We need to raise 20 or 30 brigades in… Read more »
Sadly most states have outlawed militias or regulated them so much that it is impossible to get the word out. They think that they will become overly militant and become the next SS aka NAZIS
Funny you should use that word because that was the very definition of DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST, that was Hitler’s party. I think people should know that.
The British attempted to outlaw militias a long time ago. How did that work out for them?
We ultimately became a crown colony ruled by a foreign country called Washington DC. Dictated to by a corporation called UNITED STATES CORPORATION that has no legal authority outside of the country of Washington DC.
First you say we need to form militias and then you claim it is not possible. Which is it?
The Constitution cannot be nullvoid nor restricted foreas it is a binding document of the people, by the people, for the people, to endow “creatures of statute’ actors/agents to administrate In good faith the Government we created. Indeed any act to subvert, coerce, threaten our Constitution thru Legislative sophism is an act of war and The United States Constitution mentions over and over Insurrection! Furthermore it is every citizens duty to rise up and overthrow any agent/actor engaging in incitement to strip Americas founding document. Moreover threatening Americas Constitution whether verbal or physical is Unconstitutional. Threatening any agent /actor that… Read more »
Pretty much everything you said was completely wrong and had basically no basis.
Uh, maybe you should take a looksie at U.S. Code 18, Sections 241 and 242 . . . . ?
Brain dead stupid, or shill with a hidden agenda? Any and all regulations that have not been passed by Congress do not have the force of law. WHY? Because the Constitution only granted Congress the authority to legislate, and said Constitution did not grant Congress the authority to delegate any of the powers that was granted to it. Most of the problems in our country are because people don’t know the Constitution, and then don’t realize that only we the people can hold the federal government accountable. If we would start sueing, prosecuting, and hanging members of the federal government… Read more »
If the deep state terrorist pigs are ready to DIE so be it
@Capt. Shep Coates, Deep state terrorist pigs huh? Do you know any?
He doesn’t.
@Doc, Well, … then … he has a target acquisition problem.
I believe he has bigger problems than that.
Well, if we’re gonna tip our toes into the fantasy pond that is a Constitutional Amendment, in our bitterly divided country, why not propose one that says:
Anyone proposing, writing, enabling and/or simply supporting any/all forms of regulations on the People’s Second Amendment Rights to Keep and Bear Arms, must within 30 days stand before a Sedition Tribunal with death penalty implications. Those that are found guilty must stand naked in front of a public firing squad within 30 days of conviction.
We’d see the democrat terrorists desire to usurp our Constitution end overnight.
You can amend the constitution but you can NEVER amend/ change/alter the Bill of Rights per Article 9!!!
Response to Wiz: The U.S. Constitution has 7 Articles, not 9. I assume that reference to an “Article 9” was inadvertent on your part. You may have meant to refer to the Ninth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which sets forth: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Academicians have discussed the import and relevance of the Ninth Amendment to the first Eight, and to the Tenth, but the U.S. Supreme Court has, historically, made little reference, if at all, to it. But, the Ninth Amendment,… Read more »
Roman Buhler, Good Artlcle. @Roger Katz, good comment. A little long, but really good. You write, “… we, at the Arbalest Quarrel, have concluded that Article V procedures can never amend or abrogate the Bill of Rights…” Any chance of publishing that debate, ahhh in abbreviated form?
Wild Bill, thank you for your remarks. Excuse me for being longwinded in this reply, as well. The AQ has, in many of its posts, made the point that the Bill of Rights can neither be amended nor abrogated precisely because the Bill of Rights comprises Natural Law. Natural Law qua Law originating in and from the Divine Creator is Law not created by man; ergo, it is not Law derived from man and, further, cannot be presumed to be derived from man-made law. The Bill of Rights is a codification of Divine Law. This idea is a recurring theme… Read more »
Thanks for keeping us focused on the true bullseye….
@Roger Katz, Thank you for getting back to me. You always have a thoughtful response, and I know that your time is limited.
It should be rather obvious to everyone that today you can no longer tell the difference between the Daemon rats and the Republic Rats they all crawl out of the same hole, they all sleep in the same swamp they are all filthy to the core and if you’re going to try to rely on them you will all lose. Remember we had a president who said that the constitution was nothing more than a worthless piece if paper so my advice , get more ammo get more guns and get the training because it’s coming and it’s only a… Read more »
A most excellent dissertation
Agreed ,I always look forward to posts by Mr. Katz and check The Arbalest Quarrel often,Thank You Mr. Katz.
With respect, most of your arguments are wrong. Article V sets forth the procedures to amend the Constitution. It doesn’t prohibit the Bill of Rights in particular from never being changed or altered. The Bill of Rights themselves are amendments. If your argument were true, then the 14th Amendment could never have been passed because it alters every other amendment per the Equal Protection Clause. All Article V really says, or rather based on its ommission, is that amendments cannot be repealed, they can only be added. However, additional amendments can be passed that subrogate a prior one. That’s the… Read more »
@Kerrizma, I don’t think that the 18th Amendment was the subject of the natural Rights that the first nine amendments are concerned with. Thus the 18th Amendment can be treated differently.
I think that the lesson of the 18th Amendment is that bad things happen when proposed changes to our well considered Constitution are incompletely considered.
Kerrizma, thank you for your response. You have made your point, and it is a compelling one and it is one that we, at the AQ, are not unmindful of. In fact, the AQ concedes, and has admitted as much in our earlier post—specifically, in the third paragraph of our response to “Wiz,” supra—that AQ’s position on the issue whether the first Ten Amendments can lawfully be amended or abrogated is an extreme view, not accepted by mainstream lay thought or by academicians. But, hear us out. Our position has merit, and we stand by it. We begin by way… Read more »
@Roger Katz, Most entertaining. You never disappoint. But Kerrzima proclaims that, “… the 21st amendment effectively repealing the 18th amendment. The same can be done to any other amendment if it follows the appropriate procedures, …” Can you speak briefly to that proposition?
Well stated
stevens needs to go check his depends & STFU
Do not make it easier to amend the constitution. You did not think this through. Liberals would cover us up with SJW crap, and anti-2A crap. Keep it difficult, suck it up, and cache some guns & ammo just in case.