The Objective Standard published two of my pieces in the Spring 2013 issue (not counting my blog posts).
The first in an interview: “Robert G. Natelson on State-Driven Amendments to Restrain Federal Spending.” (Elsewhere I published a series of videos of Natelson speaking on the same subject.)
Natelson summarizes the issue at hand:
Essentially, though, there are two ways to propose amendments for ratification or rejection by the states. One is for Congress to propose; the other is for two-thirds of the state legislatures to require Congress, through resolutions called “applications,” to call a “convention for proposing amendments.” A convention for proposing amendments is essentially a meeting of delegations sent by the state legislatures themselves, organized on a one-state, one-vote basis. In lieu of Congress, the convention decides whether to propose one or more amendments for ratification or rejection.
My second piece is a book review of Beyond Politics. Overall, I thought it was a pretty good book about “public choice” economics, but it has some serious problems. I conclude:
Despite its serious theoretical problems—problems shared by most economic texts today—Beyond Politics offers a powerful critique of many types of government economic controls. Those who read it carefully will better understand the common rationale for government intervention in the economy—and the “public choice” criticisms of such intervention. Although Simmons does not offer anything like a complete case for capitalism that integrates morality and economics, he offers some important economic tools useful in building or fortifying such a case.
You can read the complete articles—and all the other great content in the Spring issue—over at The Objective Standard.
