This commentary originally appeared in the Austin American-Statesman on January 18, 2016.

Through his proposal presented at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s 14th annual policy orientation, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott recognized that moving our nation from wrong track to right direction now requires more than another election cycle; it requires amending the Constitution to reign in our out-of-control federal government.

This month, 67 percent of likely United States voters answered “wrong track” when asked the simple question: “Do you think the country is heading in the right direction or on the wrong track?” This opinion poll takes the temperature of voters on where they see their country heading — toward dawn or dusk. In reality, this question asks: “Do you think the direction your government is taking the country is heading in the right direction or on the wrong track?” Sadly, this sentiment has consistently remained stuck in the range of this percentage for the past seven years.

One need not look any further than the United States Constitution for the instructions on how the people may force a course correction in our nation’s state of affairs. It is as simple as the Constitution — yes, that old document that partisans on both sides of the political spectrum are fond of waving in the air, yet hardly seem to have ever read.

Whereas the Constitution is usually referred to in terms of the enumerated rights granted to the federal government and also reserved to the people, it also provides the rules for the peaceful transfer of power between elected officials. The Constitution sets forth terms of office and the process for electing officials. At times, elections have resulted in consequences beyond the Framers’ intent. In these times, the 12th and 22nd Amendments afforded a process to conform modern situations with the will of the people and the Framers’ intent.

However, in the past several years, while two-thirds of Americans consistently see our nation as heading on the wrong track, we have had plenty of elections. Party control in both houses of Congress has transferred from Democrat to Republican and, with it, changes in leadership from Nancy Pelosi to John Boehner to Paul Ryan and from Harry Reid to Mitch McConnell. Yet, public sentiment about our nation remains consistently poor.

Candidly, Abbott’s proposal to convene a convention of the states to amend the Constitution is not a novel concept. It is not novel because the basis — and legitimacy — of Abbott’s “Texas Plan” proposal is copied directly from the black letters of the Constitution.

Article V provides the mechanism for proposal and ratification of amendments to the Constitution. Constitutional conventions may be called in two ways: by two-thirds of the members of both houses of Congress, or by the legislatures of two-thirds of the states. The Constitution, with its 27 amendments, has been amended 17 times since the first 10 of the Bill of Rights were ratified in 1791. Several other states have already taken steps in this direction, and this past legislative session, several dozen Texas legislators filed a resolution calling for the same.

At a high-level overview, Abbott’s Texas Plan offers nine constitutional amendments:

  • Prohibit Congress from regulating activity that occurs wholly within one state.
  • Require Congress to balance its budget.
  • Prohibit administrative agencies — and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them — from creating federal law.
  • Prohibit administrative agencies — and the unelected bureaucrats that staff them — from preempting state law.
  • Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
  • Require a seven-justice, super-majority vote for U.S. Supreme Court decisions that invalidate a democratically enacted law.
  • 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.
  • Give state officials the power to sue in federal court when federal officials overstep their bounds.
  • Allow a two-thirds majority of the states to override a federal law or regulation.

Critics and skeptics will nitpick the details. However, Abbott acknowledged that his plan is not a take-it-or-leave-it proposal; the substance is not etched in stone. Public debate and discourse should follow. However, given the thunderous accolades with which Abbott’s “Texas Plan” proposal has been met, right leadership is the first step toward moving our nation away from the wrong track.

Henneke is the general counsel and director of the Center for the American Future at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.