Power to some of the people

Marco Rubio says he'd change the Constitution, or at least put the 'full weight and force of the presidency” behind an effort to change it.

The Florida senator and Republican presidential hopeful told a town hall in Cedar Rapids Tuesday that he backs the 'Convention of States” movement, which seeks to call a constitutional convention using a provision of Article V requiring such a gathering if two-thirds of state legislatures, 34, call for it. That convention, according to its backers, would address 'limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government.”

'The framers of our Constitution were geniuses. They all happened to live in the same place at the same time by providence,” Rubio said. 'And they created a mechanism whereby the people could take control of the government if the government was leaving them behind or out of touch.”

Rubio says he favors amendments mandating a balanced federal budget and placing term limits on Congress and Supreme Court. He contends a convention could be limited to those topics. The movement has it all figured out. What could go wrong?

Apparently this is a big deal in certain conservative circles, with multiple groups pushing for various types of conventions. So far, only a handful of states have taken the bait. Last year, the Iowa House voted 54-43 along party lines for a resolution calling for a convention. The Senate didn't take it up.

The likelihood that 34 states will join in, or that 38 states would ratify any amendments that came from such a convention, are slim. Even the full force of President Rubio probably wouldn't change much.

That's comforting, considering what a bad idea it is. Popping the hood on the Constitution at this moment in our politics is the stuff of nightmares. I don't know about Rubio, but I'm not seeing many current politicians brought to us by providence. And there are serious questions as to how limited such a convention would be in reality.

I'm sympathetic to the feeling things are so broken we need to break out the dynamite. But this stuff, as good as it sounds, is more about gaming the system to get what one slice of the political spectrum wants than it is about giving power back to the people.

Rubio wants a balanced-budget amendment while he talks about how our navy is too small and our air force is too old and we need to deploy thousands more border agents. Oh, and don't forget 700 miles of walls and fences, boots on the ground overseas and tax cuts. I guess balance won't apply to everything.

So we need a balanced-budget amendment to force massive program cuts that haven't happened because they're unpopular. We need term limits because voters just aren't smart enough to get rid of members of Congress they support. And we need Supreme Court term limits mainly because it issues rulings we don't like. The movement knows best. Better government through automation.

These are pure, democratic motives, clearly. Add this stuff to efforts to 'safeguard” voting, and partisan redistricting, and you've got a nice tidy package of measures aimed at putting a big old thumb on one side of the scale.

Disagree? You must not be one of Rubio's 'people.”

l Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@thegazette.com