Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing one or more amendments to the constitution to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and to limit the terms of office of federal officials and members of Congress.
If HJR98 is acted upon and a convention is called, it could lead to significant implications for federal and state dynamics. The amendments sought through this resolution would likely aim at reducing the national debt and curbing what supporters describe as abusive spending habits of the federal government. Moreover, there would be clearer limitations on federal authority, allowing for greater state rights and autonomy in governance, fundamentally altering the interplay between state and federal powers in the United States legal framework.
HJR98 is a joint resolution from the Texas Legislature proposing an application to the United States Congress to call a convention under Article V of the US Constitution. The primary aim of this resolution is to propose amendments that would impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and set term limits for federal officials and members of Congress. The resolution emphasizes the belief that state legislatures have a duty to act as guardians of liberty against federal overreach, especially regarding fiscal responsibility and state rights.
The sentiment around HJR98 appears to be highly polarized. Supporters advocate that limiting federal power is a necessary step to protect state interests and promote responsible governance. They argue that excessive federal influence can hinder local autonomy and result in unfunded mandates that adversely affect state budgets. Conversely, opponents of the resolution may view it as a vehicle for promoting an overly aggressive agenda against federal governance, fearing it may destabilize important federal programs and protections in various sectors including healthcare and public safety.
One notable point of contention revolves around the legitimacy and practicality of calling a convention under Article V. Critics warn of the risks involved in opening the Constitution to amendments, particularly concerning the unpredictable nature of a constitutional convention. There are concerns regarding potential unintended consequences that could arise from broad amendments proposed in a convention setting, including the risk of eroding fundamental rights and protections currently in place.