It may surprise the majority of Americans that there is a movement(s) transpiring to call a Article V Constitutional Convention of States. Amongst political activists however, there is much awareness of this movement. And there has been much debate and consternation regarding the merits of having an Article V Constitutional Convention. This writer is forced, for the current time, to come out against the Article V Constitutional Convention as the best method to address our nations current problems. So widely diverse is this writer's reasons for opposing an Article V Constitutional Convention at this time, that it will take some effort to distill them into coherent, digestible "sound bites".
Before we begin with that task, let us talk a little more about the nuts and bolts of the Article V Constitutional Convention Process. The proposed method of Article V Constitutional Convention being proposed requires that 2/3's (currently 34) of the State Legislatures must vote and submit applications to convene an Amendment-Proposing Convention. And then, a 3/4's vote(currently 38) of the States would have to occur for the Proposed Amendment(s) to become part of the Constitution. You can learn more about Article V Constitutional Conventions and the Constitutional Convention process here. During the 1970s & 1980s, calls for a Constitutional Convention to require a balanced budget gained 30 applications from the States, failed for need of 34. However, to date, an Article V Constitutional Convention has never been used to amend the Constitution.
There are many issues driving the desire for a Article V Constitutional Convention. This writer's short list includes:
Those were my thoughts.
Keep fighting the Good Fight!
Thank you, my fellow citizens, for taking your valuable time to read and reflect upon what is written here.
Keep Fighting the Good Fight!
WE THE PEOPLE TAR Twitter #WETHEPEOPLETAR
Lawless America #LawlessAmerica
Term Limits #TermLimit
Justice in Minnesota #JIM
Critical Thinking Notice - This author advises you as no politician would dare. Exercise Critical Thinking in determining the truthfulness of anything you read or hear. Do not passively accept nor believe anything anyone tells you, including this author... unless and until you verify it yourself with sources you trust and could actively defend your perspective to anyone who might debate you to the contrary of your perspective.
Sorry Don, But using that title the way you have appears to be a deliberate attempt to imply that the Patriots For America web forum, and it's membership and leaders, are against any type of Constitutional convention. While many people here are definitely against it, using the title in that manor is misleading......So I will insist on editing and changing your title. I changed your title to "This Writer is: Against an Article V Constitutional Convention of States"
Now with that being said and done, please allow me to also rip your article apart executive privilege, and just plain member discussion.
Using your logic and description and your apparent understanding (or lack thereof) of a Constitutional Convention of States I am also opposed to it, under your definition and description. Under your view and understanding of the process this would actually open the Constitution up for virtually any and all revisions and potential editing and alterations any one wanted to write. A process which at this time would result in the complete and total destruction of anything currently in those documents.
My understanding of a true Article V Constitutional Convention of the States is completely different from that.
Yes, the process requires 2/3rd majority of the States to pass any changes. But those changes being proposed must be precisely the same across each and every State. The written language on any issue, (term limits for example) must be precisely the same in each bill submitted and voted upon in each state's legislature. Once those specific articles and items (each one identical from every State), have been voted on and approved by 2/3rds of the States those proposed amendments are sent to Congress. At that point Congress has no alternative but to pass and declare the amendment as being passed and ratified and the Constitution thereby amended. Congress does NOT have the power or the authority to edit amend or alter the amendment which has been ratified by the 34 States.
Here is a possible example, again Term limits; (No attempt to make it look real here, it's just an example)
Representatives to Congress shall be limited to two (2) consecutive two-year terms (4-years) for the House of Representatives and two consecutive 6-year terms (12-years) in the Senate.
The proposed amendment would be sent to the legislature of all 50 States. The written language of the proposed amendment must be precisely the same in each State bill. No alterations or deviations allowed, approve it like it is or forget it. Once that proposed amendment is voted on and approved by 2/3rd of the States it is sent to Congress and declared as a Constitutional amendment. Period. They have nothing to say about it, and no alterations or amendments to that item is permitted.
Now I may be wrong but that is my understanding of the Article V Constitutional amendment process.
It's NOT an open book free-for-all process and no other existing amendments of the Constitution are effected, (The Second amendment can not be altered or deleted.) The Constitution is NOT opened up for a free-for-all hatchet job.
Of all that I've read about this topic you have said it best: "The Constitution is NOT opened up for a free-for-all hatchet job." I'm beyond annoyed that washed-up politicians want to change our Constitution when they should have been defending it and that for which it stands in the first place. Was that not part of their oaths of office and job descriptions?
IMHO, a COS or Con-Con is a waste of time, energy and money until after we deal with a few of biggest cons of our century.
1. The PATRIOT Act
2. The National Defense Authorization Act
The Founding Fathers didn't have this nonsense to actually deal with -- although they suspected that the clear and present dangers of these type threats may one day present themselves.
There is one additional aspect to this COS proposal,,,,, Time.......
Even if you could somehow get all 50 States to agree to submit a proposed amendment and then set up a legislative vote, and then managed to get all the proposals coordinated so that they all have the exact same language.. You're still talking about years in the process,,,,, not weeks of months.
We have a president and congress that apparently don't give a tinker's damn about the Constitution now. Why would we expect them to honour anything new amended to it?
It's a complete waste of time at this point. We should be concentrating on removing those Congressional Representatives and legislators who are refusing to stand up and uphold the Constitution now.
We need to concentrate on throwing some people out. We need to find the legal process required to evict and expell these reps.
I believe a Modern Declaration of Causes, similar to the one the Founder's did 7/6/1775, would be much more effective in accomplishing our goals. I am working on a first draft of one as we type.... lol
I stand with you on this being a very dangerous move - the original convention from which resulted our Constitution, which was supplanted by the United States Corporation in the 1860's and '70s, was also supposed to only change a few items and ended up coming up with an entirely new document. The same could easily happen with another convention - bad, bad move!!!!
The merits of having an Article V Constitutional Convention, is in fact the Constitution. The problem is that seeing how your Government officials of America, have altered the Constitution to the forum of called Incorporated Constitution. This Corporation Constitution was enabled while most Americans slept. The foundation of it came from the Crown Of England, and the Central Banking System for the Federal Reserve.
How, it is because most of those voted into office in your country are related to the Crown, the Queen Of England. Yes this Convention of State will move forward and yes the Constitution will be restored back to its original form. America's freedom of the Revolutionary War is still a ongoing battle.