As I believe I posted earlier on an equally addled bill, "this one goin' nowhere neither!" To strip Article III jurisdiction would require amending Article III, i.e., the Constitution, and that ain't gonna happen. OTOH, a legislative grant of standing to parties who do not now have it could pass Constitutional muster, since Congress has the power to determine the scope of the federal courts' jurisdiction. E.g., allowing proponents of ballot measures to defend them in the federal courts where the state officers charged with doing so, usually the AG or Governor, refuse to perform the duty they swore to do, thereby allowing those measures to die by default. That IMO, the standing issue, is the one thing SCOTUS got wrong in deciding the CA gay marriage cases and they got it wrong in a big way that cries out for reform, the dispensive urgings of Eric Holder notwithstanding.