The Texas Tribune writes up his call here: Abbott Calls on States to Amend U.S. Constitution.
Here's a direct link to his full proposal: Restoring the Rule of Law with States Leading the Way.
He calls it the Texas Plan and its intended to reign in what he deems excessive activity by the national government, laws and regulations that interfere with the states. On page 4 of the document he proposes offering nine constitutional amendments.
I. Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one State.
II. Require Congress to balance its budget.
III. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from creating federal law.
IV. Prohibit administrative agencies—and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them—from preempting state law.
V. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
VI. Require a seven-justice super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law.
VII. Restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments by limiting the former to the powers expressly delegated to it in the Constitution.
VIII. Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.
IX. Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.
These will be worth considering independently over the course of the semester. I've also intended - at some point - to summarize the lawsuits Abbott filed against the national government when he was Attorney General. I have a hunch there is a strong relationship between the subject of those lawsuits and these proposed amendments.
Not everyone is on board - including some fellow Republicans. The Texas Tribune article concludes with some cautionary notes:
Critics of the convention approach say the constitutional rules governing a meeting of the states could allow for a "runaway convention," in which an unlimited number of amendments could be offered, potentially creating drastic changes to the U.S. Constitution. Tea Party groups opposed Perry's 2011 proposal on similar grounds.
Konni Burton, now a Republican state senator from Colleyville, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that year that such a convention could allow "anyone to offer up any number of amendments... based on their own ideology and interests, which could ultimately radically change our Constitution." At the time, she was speaking on behalf of the NE Tarrant Tea Party.
Abbott insists those fears are unfounded. His policy paper argues the Constitution "leaves it to the states to limit the scope of the convention." And even if additional amendments were offered, he writes, "none of the delegates' efforts would become law without approval from three-fourths of the states."
It concludes with a quote from Senator Cruz that ties this effort into an originalistic view of the Constitution. I'm working on written assignments that will dig into the different ways that the Constitution is interpreted.
As Abbott was preparing to unveil his proposal on Friday, his protégé in the attorney general’s office, presidential contender Ted Cruz, was pledging to push for “quite a few” constitutional amendments of his own if elected. Speaking with reporters while campaigning in Iowa, the U.S. senator from Texas said a balanced budget amendment is among the add-ons the country most critically needs.
Cruz, the former solicitor general of Texas, went on to reiterate his calls for constitutional amendments that would impose term limits for members of Congress and justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. He has also proposed a constitutional amendment that would leave it to state legislatures to define marriage.
“There are many more amendments we need, in part because the federal government and the courts have gotten so far away from the original text and the original understanding of our Constitution,” Cruz told reporters after a stop in Webster City, Iowa.
