I generally like the idea of restoring federalism, but I don’t agree with some of the provisions in this amendment proposal.

I would have liked to have seen something limiting federal tax receipts to expenditures necessary and proper for carrying into execution those powers explicitly enumerated to the national government.

I like the idea of limiting the Congress’ commerce power, but don’t agree with permitting the Congress to regulate harmful emissions. I worry about the how this power will be interpreted later to expand national power at the expense of State’s rights, and I simply believe that such regulation would/could be more properly done through voluntary inter-state compacts.

I also like the limit on conditional expenditures to States, but would also like to see a prohibition against grants and loans to individuals to prohibit the same coercion and manipulation of intra-state policy (that has been inflicted by attaching strings on expenditures to the States) by simply going around State government with conditional grants directly to the people. This is especially important as the national expenditures were not limited to carryout explicitly enumerated national powers.

Limiting treaties – this is necessary, but it just reminds me of how sad our situation has become, that we have to remind the Congress that if the constitution doesn’t say it can do something, then it can’t do it – its reserved to the States.

This is another necessary provision, but it is another proof of just how absolutely ridiculous things have become. Someone remind me again, what was the point of having a written constitution?

Making it more difficult to raise taxes – good.

State checks on federal powers – great, but does that include nullifying a decision of the SCOTUS? I hope so.

Term limits? I’m still on the fence on that one.

I’m all for the line item veto, but was concerned with granting the President such an increase in power, so the idea that this power would be limited to only those occasions when the budget is not balanced is intriguing to say the least.

I would like to know more about the rationale behind the 9th Article on the rights retained by the people/due process.

Restoring constitutionalism is what I’d call the tenth article, but then again it really is the underlying theme for this whole plan.