[SatinDoll]

I DO NOT LIKE THIS AT ALL; WE CAN ADD AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION NOW.

WE DON’T NEED AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION THAT POLITICIANS CAN DOMINATE.

[Jacquerie]

Why would our oppressors in DC propose amendments to curb their power? They haven't and they won't.

There is no need to shout.

[Doug Loss]

I'm curious; just how do you think you (or we) can add amendments to the Constitution now? Other than by an Article V convention, the only way is for Congress to propose them. Do you really think we the people have more influence over Congress than we would over the state-appointed conventioneers? Besides, as it has been pointed out numerous times, all this convention would do (or Congress, for that matter) would be to propose amendments. They'd still need to be ratified by 38 states before they went into affect.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

WE DON’T NEED AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION THAT POLITICIANS CAN DOMINATE.

Why would you let them?

Did you have your heart set on shooting your way out of this?

[Girlene]

Amendments added to the Constitution thus far have been initiated by Congresses. What this article is describing is a Constitutional Convention that is initiated by the STATE legislators. States have the power to also propose amendments. This is about proposing procedures for such a state led convention.

It would require 2/3 of the states to propose it and 3/4’s of the states to ratify any amendment.

[stremba]

An article V convention merely allows the states to control what amendments are proposed. Without that, the only other way to bring up amendments would be to have them proposed by Congress by a 2/3 vote of both houses. The whole point of the Article V convention is to bypass Congress since it’s unlikely that they’d propose ANYTHING that would actaully limit Federal power.

In either case, though, any amendments proposed would have to go through the normal ratification process, with any proposed amendments requiring ratification by 3/4 of the states before taking effect.

[Awgie]

Hands off my constitution!

Amend if you can, but there is not a politician alive that has the depth of character and wisdom necessary to be trusted with our founding documents.