Although his site has been scrubbed since the economy really hit the fan, McCain used to prominently advocate requiring a 3/5ths Congressional majority to pass legislation raising taxes (you can now only find that proposition on backwater pages). This is an interesting proposition, and one modestly in line with current Constitutional values (Art. I, § 7: “All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives”), but it would also require a constitutional amendment to pass.
The question, then, is just how much of this position is grandstanding: I’d say, at least 95%. Constitutional amendments rarely pass, especially if they originate from the backwater of a losing candidate’s webpage. And it’d be of uncertain & confounding effect (when are tax increases controversial?). This plank of McCain’s platform, then – now somewhat repudiated – is another attempt to pander without any real promise of change behind it. Had McCain made this a major issue, I would have worried.
I’m not well versed in these sorts of legal matters, but I am interested. Would you mind elaborating on your point?
On the face of it, it doesn’t strike me as a terrible idea to require a broader consensus to raise taxes, though I suspect a rule that cuts both ways would be better. Do you feel 3/5ths majority is too high? When you say you’d be worried if McCain made this a major issue, is that because you think it’s a bad idea; or that you think it would make him a more desirable candidate; or is it simply a that of passing an amendment with “uncertain effects” is troubling.. which is certainly is?
Anyway, it’s not clear to me what you’re trying to get across, and I would love to be enlightened.
Posted by Jonathan | September 27, 2008, 3:31 pmAh, sorry about that :). I think the potential of it actually being passed is so slim that it amounts to grandstanding: the plan would require a constitutional amendment, and those things just don’t happen, really. And even if it did get passed, I’m not sure it would have much effect. Most taxes – as far as I understand it, and I might be wrong – pass as part of must-pass omnibus legislation. Which is to say, they pass by super-majorities, and a 3/5 requirement wouldn’t make much of a difference.
Apart from that, 3/5 is a bad number to put back in the Constitution…
Posted by Ames | September 27, 2008, 5:05 pm