Read Mark Levin’s book
I did. Closely.
On page 16 of The Liberty Amendments, he writes: “Moreover, the state legislatures determine if they want to make application for a convention; the method for selecting their delegates; and the subject matter of the convention.” So far, so good. The states do indeed determine what they will consider, at the convention!
However, I am unfortunately deeply disappointed in regard to the following:
Levin's endnote 29 of page 225: “The state legislatures can recommend specific language or amendment, but cannot seek to impose them through the application process as Article V empowers the delegates to the convention to propose amendments, which the states subsequently consider for ratification. The applications from the states must also be similar in subject area to reasonably conclude that two-thirds of the states are calling for a convention to address the same matters.”
I find his two points to be contradictory. The first acknowledges state power to propose amendments at the convention. The second demands states submit similar subject applications to be considered at the convention.
There is no requirement for single topic applications.
Neither can Congress control the scope of discussion at the convention.
Those extra-constitutional requirements are power grabs designed by those in power to stymie a constitutional and God given right of the people. If congress and the courts had the power to control the process, they would have been enumerated in Articles I and III.
Madison's notes from the Federal Convention, Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 85, and subsequent state ratification debates made it clear that amendments were to be hashed out at their convention. Article V was a critical factor leading to the adoption of the new constitution. It is contradictory to its purpose for congress or courts to control both amending routes.