TX Governor calls for Constitutional convention.

[Thomkal]

Wasn't quite sure which thread to post this in so started my own :) Texas Governor Greg Abbott is proposing a Constitutional Convention so we can get back to the "rule of law" and give states much more power to overturn things the federal government enacts into law and return the federal government to the powers he says delegated to it in the Constitution. Here's a list of the nine amendments he proposed. I immediately noticed #5 and #6, which were clearly included so states could find a way around the gay marriage ruling. My question(s) is: do you agree with any of these amendments and do any of them have a chance at all of being ratified by the States?

Texas Governor Proposes Nine Amendments To The U.S. Constitution - BuzzFeed News (http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/texas-governor-proposes-nine-constitutional-amendments?bffbpolitics&utm_term=.rg3lqV4aY#.hkBJMxApK)

[JAG]

After the convention envisioned by the Constitution for proposing the amendments would be held, then three fourths of the states — through the state legislatures or through state conventions — would need to ratify the amendments.

No chance in hell.

[Senator]

Texan checking in.

Nope.

[JPhillips]

If we've just, "forgotten what it means," why do we need nine new amendments?

[NobodyHere]

I'm all for a balanced budget amendment though I would throw in a clause that would permit a deficit during times of congress declared war.

[tarcone]

Your provision on congress declaring war is a loophole though. We have been at war for the past, what? Forever? If congress is the same party as the president. Then we may never see a balanced budget c

I might be for a war tax. That would, at least give the people a say. When the citizens wear out. They vote in anti-war congress people and senators.

I like it. In fact, in voting yes.

[NobodyHere]

The last time we declared war was in 1941

[kcchief19]

@GovAbbot, congratulations on your constitutional amendments!. Hoping for an all-Texas #ConstitutionalConvention. Looking at you @AmendmentIX.
https://cbsdallas.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/abbott.jpg?w=503&h=349&crop=1

[EagleFan]

I do agree that the states should have more power and the federal government has ballooned out of control.

There was a time when politicians served their states not their parties.

[tarcone]

The last time we declared war was in 1941

Yes, I understand. But when congress is the way it is today, is forced to choose between a balanced budget or declaring war to keep spending, what do you think they would do?

[JonInMiddleGA]

If you could get #7 you'd probably need the others a lot less.

I'd probably be on board for all of these with the exception of the balanced budget one simply because I doubt you could meet contractual obligations if you tried to balance it overnight.

[BishopMVP]

I do agree that the states should have more power and the federal government has ballooned out of control.

There was a time when politicians served their states not their parties.This. It does lead to elitism, but I think repealing the 17th amendment would be a good thing.

Let's take health care as an example. Because unlike gay marriage, or abortion, it's not something where there's a right or a wrong, but everyone agrees it could be better and there's just a huge debate over how to improve it. So why not let Massachusetts try "Obamacare", and let Texas try a complete free market, and let other states try what they think is best. Then maybe we can come to more of a national consensus, or at least get some hard data on what works and what sounds nice in theory but doesn't work in practice before massively overhauling the system everywhere. And if it really comes down to it people can vote with their feet.

[larrymcg421]

And if it really comes down to it people can vote with their feet.

Maybe my least favorite argument in all of politics.

[stevew]

This is the same Yahoo that wasted money monitoring the Jade Helm takeover of the Southeast. It's hard to take anything he says seriously.

[HomerSimpson98]

Abbott already giving Perry a run for his money on idiocy. Way to go Greg!

[NobodyHere]

Hey Abbott!

[AENeuman]

States of America. I'm down with that. Of course the inability for most of these states to be fiscally independent means California and Texas will have to build that trump wall along state borders as well.

[sabotai]

Hey Abbott!

I hate that guy!

[cuervo72]

So why not let Massachusetts try "Obamacare", and let Texas try a complete free market, and let other states try what they think is best.

That's going to be a headache in some ways. Like for my company, who has employees working and/or living in DC, MD, VA, and PA. Is their provider going to have to play by four sets of rules on one plan depending on where an employee lives?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Is their provider going to have to play by four sets of rules on one plan depending on where an employee lives?

Isn't that pretty much normal though,since states have always set their own rules for licensing insurance providers?

*maybe I misunderstood what you were saying though

[cuervo72]

They do have to find someone that will cover everybody, but I figure most of these companies are regional/national so it's not that big a deal. UnitedHealthcare, Cigna, etc. - guys are almost everywhere. I think the question would be for claims sorting out who gets reimbursed or is even eligible for which services. I could easily see states having different rules on drugs, psychiatric services, abortion & birth control, etc. I don't know, maybe they have to sort a lot of that stuff out now.

[Radii]

I don't know, maybe they have to sort a lot of that stuff out now.

They do, from a technical perspective this doesn't seem like a big deal and is already being done with the usage of different plans on a smaller scale today. Examples I can think of off the top of my head are lots of localized payers in Mass I assume to accout for RomneyCare (or whatever we call their insurance laws). Texas has a state law called the "Prompt Payment Statute" that makes rules around Obamacare plans slightly different. I've run into lots of different insurances in my job where they are doing one-off plans that are totally different for University Employees, or any large scale employer really can potentially negotiate something different than standard plans for their employees.

Big payers are already set up to deal with stuff like this pretty easily and small payers are usually very localized anyway so it likely wouldn't matter for them.

[cuervo72]

Hmm, maybe it's not an issue then.

[Galaxy]

This. It does lead to elitism, but I think repealing the 17th amendment would be a good thing.

Let's take health care as an example. Because unlike gay marriage, or abortion, it's not something where there's a right or a wrong, but everyone agrees it could be better and there's just a huge debate over how to improve it. So why not let Massachusetts try "Obamacare", and let Texas try a complete free market, and let other states try what they think is best. Then maybe we can come to more of a national consensus, or at least get some hard data on what works and what sounds nice in theory but doesn't work in practice before massively overhauling the system everywhere. And if it really comes down to it people can vote with their feet.

The problem with health care is it doesn't fix the real problem: healthy living and quality of life. Being proactive and not reactive to our taking care of bodies is the best place to start.

[JPhillips]

The problem with health care is it doesn't fix the real problem: healthy living and quality of life. Being proactive and not reactive to our taking care of bodies is the best place to start.

Agreed to an extent, but we're all going to die, most of us after some sort of illness or traumatic injury. That care costs a ton, and there's not a whole lot we can do to get around it.

Now we can save a lot of money by limiting chronic disease, but we'll still need access to healthcare.

[tarcone]

My question is why does it have to cost a lot?
My daughter just got her wisdom teeth pulled. $3000. Why so expensive?
I am diabetic. So I buy insulin every month. If I don't have insurance it costs about $90 for one bottle. Why?
Isn't the development and R & D paid off?

The cost of these things are ridiculous. In my opinion it is price gouging.

[JPhillips]

My question is why does it have to cost a lot?
My daughter just got her wisdom teeth pulled. $3000. Why so expensive?
I am diabetic. So I buy insulin every month. If I don't have insurance it costs about $90 for one bottle. Why?
Isn't the development and R & D paid off?

The cost of these things are ridiculous. In my opinion it is price gouging.

Of course, but our system allows it. The government isn't even legally allowed to demand the lowest cost the drug/procedure costs on any other health plan. Hospitals don't have any transparency in pricing, and evidence based medical practice leads to screams about death panels.

We have the most expensive healthcare in the word because the people that make money off of it control the system.

[Galaxy]

Agreed to an extent, but we're all going to die, most of us after some sort of illness or traumatic injury. That care costs a ton, and there's not a whole lot we can do to get around it.

Now we can save a lot of money by limiting chronic disease, but we'll still need access to healthcare.

More than 1/3 of American adults are obese. 69% of all American adults are considered either obese or overweight. 20% of kids between the ages of 12-19 are obese. The number is 17.7% for kids between 6-11. That's going to drive your health care costs and usage up, up, and up.

On your statement, should we extend the care and treatment to extend a very elderly in a fragile state for a few more months of life? (Not picking a side, but it's something that other countries don't do the way we do here.)