>Congressman Scott Garrett: Constitutional Citation Rule Needs Teeth to be Effective
Garrett: Constitutional Citation Rule Needs Teeth to be Effective
Offers amendment to rules package enhance constitutional citation rule
WASHINGTON, January 4, 2011 – The House Republican Conference today held an organizational meeting to consider amendments to the Rules of the House of Representatives for the 112th Congress. During consideration, Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ) offered an amendment to clarify and enhance the proposed House rule that would require all bills to be accompanied by a statement citing the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the proposed law.
“While I appreciate the Republican leadership for following through on the promise we made in the Pledge to America, I believe the proposed House rule requiring that all bills cite the Constitution needs to have real teeth to in order to be effective,” said Garrett. “In other words,” Garrett continued, “we have to make sure we are fostering an actual debate on the constitutionality of legislation without letting Members of the House off the hook by using the vague, and often times abused, ‘common defense,’ ‘general welfare,’ and ‘necessary and proper’ clauses of the Constitution. In order to truly cultivate a robust debate on the constitutionality of legislation, I believe all legislation must cite an enumerated power of the constitution in the actual bill text.”
Garrett’s amendments to the constitutional citation rule would have required the text of all bills and amendments to contain a statement appropriately citing a specific power granted to Congress in the Constitution. The “common defense,” “general welfare,” and “necessary and proper” clauses of Section 8, Article I of the Constitution would not be considered appropriate Constitutional citations. If a bill or amendment failed to comply, it would be subject to a point of order that could not be waived by the Rules Committee. As a result, each side would have 10 minutes of debate followed by a vote on whether or not to table the point of order and move to consideration of the bill or amendment.
