Convention of States

As Donald Trump and Ted Cruz battle for first place in Indiana’s heated presidential primary, many don’t realize that the Indiana state legislature has already taken steps to ensure freedom and prosperity for generations to come. Earlier this year, The Hoosier State voted to pass the Convention of States resolution, which calls for an Article V Amendments Convention for the purpose of limiting the size, scope, and jurisdiction of the federal government. Presidential contenders can talk about shrinking government and eliminating the debt, but only a Convention of States can actually reverse 100 years of activist Supreme Court decisions and keep the feds from overstepping their constitutional boundaries.

Tennessee and Oklahoma have passed the Convention of States resolution this year as well, bringing the total number of states calling for an Article V Amendments Convention to seven. Fifteen additional states are currently considering the resolution, and there are active Convention of States organizations in every state. The Convention of States resolution also calls for amendments that force Congress to be fiscally responsible and limit the terms of office for federal officials. The American people are tired of talking about a solution to federal overreach. They’re doing something to stop it, and patriots from all over the country are catching the vision.

I’ve heard people express concerns about the COS, usually on the idea that liberals could use the opportunity to hijack things even further... but at present, I disagree. First of all, liberals are ALREADY hijacking the Constitution through activist liberal judges (we’ve legalized the murder of children, the practice of sodomy, and the destruction of marriage, all within 50 years). Second, the states have a majority of GOP governors and state legislatures. Finally, there’s a lot of outrage against “his majesty, King George Obama” which might fade if someone slightly less loathsome were to take office. The time is ripe.

One of my own private reasons for supporting the idea is the deterioration of the American mind. Education (or, more accurately, social programming with a bit of low-quality babysitting thrown in) is in shambles, the upcoming generations are so addicted to mobile internet and social media that their attention spans are that of an average gnat (with roughly the same command of the English language that a gnat has), and they’ve been raised to feel entitled to anything and everything. We can’t take 3-5 more decades of this, without turning into a full-fledged statist experiment like China.

(I have to say: evidence for the above is starting to be seen on FR, as of late, too... where debate [even heated debate] is often replaced by nothing but snarks and snarls [and not very creative ones, at that], profanity is in place of actual substance, and debate has degenerated to mutual howls which are the equivalent of “Yeah, well, you’re an idiot/traitor/[insert negative descriptor, here], and by the way, your mama...!” It’s like watching kids throw mud-pies at each other; no one “wins”, and there’s a mess everywhere. I can’t be the only one to have noticed.)

”… but only a Convention of States can actually reverse 100 years of activist Supreme Court decisions and keep the feds from overstepping their constitutional boundaries."

Although I have suggestions for constitutional amendments, repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments for example, I respectfully disagree with the author that amending the Constitution is the only way to put the unconstitutionally big federal government back into its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited power cage.

More specifically, parents can start making sure that their children are taught the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers as the Founding States had intended for those powers to be understood. Constitution-savvy voters can then start exercising their voting muscle to “force” the feds back into their Section 8-limited power cage.

A state sovereignty-respecting Congress can then fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.

Remember in November !

liberals could use the opportunity to hijack things even further... but at present, I disagree. First of all, liberals are ALREADY hijacking the Constitution through activist liberal judges (we’ve legalized the murder of children, the practice of sodomy, and the destruction of marriage, all within 50 years).

Liberals WILL hijack the process, but they won't do it alone...

Second, the states have a majority of GOP governors and state legislatures.

The left WILL hijack the process, with the express assistance of their uniparty counterparts, make no mistake. The backroom deals will fly and, in order for the right to get some of their amendments passed, will agree to support some of the left's proposals.

You know, all in the name of "bipartisanship".

Yes, Article V was a tool provided to us by the Founders....during a time when there wasn't necessarily a "uniparty" as we have today. Mark my words: we will NOT get what we are expecting from an Article V convention.

Well said.

Some wag wrote that at least Iran has ayatollahs to make religious decisions. In the US, religious decisions are ultimately up to a majority of nine lawyers.

Even if Bernie and The Beast are kept out of La Casa Blanca, our demise is only delayed.

Article V.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.