Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

34 States Call for Constitutional Convention - and Possible Rewrite
Newsmax ^ | April 11, 2014 | Andrea Billups

Posted on 04/13/2014 5:05:22 PM PDT by EveningStar

Even with Michigan recently becoming the 34th state to call for a Constitutional Convention, it's not at all certain that a rewrite of the nation's founding document is close at hand...

Unless called to deal with a specific issue, some legal experts warn a "runaway" convention could create chaos.

"Let's assume that we get Congress to call for a convention, and we are deliberating about one item. Maybe that would stick. But how can you be confident that once you open the door to a constitutional convention, even if for one narrow amendment, that it won't just become a runaway convention?" said Steve Hayward, a visiting scholar in conservative thought and policy at the University of Colorado in Boulder.

"It seems to me that our Constitution may have problems these days, but I think most conservatives would be very nervous about opening it up to a new convention," Hayward told Newsmax...

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amendment; amendments; amendmentsconvention; articlev; articlevconvention; constitution; convention; conventionofstates; libertyamendments; marklevin; soros; statesconvention
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-115 next last
To: Repeal The 17th

Do you have a firearm?

Do you expect to keep it after a “new” interpretation?


61 posted on 04/13/2014 6:12:14 PM PDT by eyedigress ((zOld storm chaser from the west)/ ?s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bfh333

Sounds good in theory but you’d have to have a pretty good change of the guard to mke it happen. Its going to be a lot of work but Obamacare and 0’s bad behavior and track record may make the job easier. Educating the public about what is really happening with facts to back it up may make a big difference over time. I anticipate that their next move is to take over the Internet and control it in a way that has ever been seen before. Alternate Internet communication methods need to be ready to go.


62 posted on 04/13/2014 6:16:00 PM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
A redefinition of the Commerce Clause (the original view was that Congress was granted a narrow and exclusive power to regulate shipments across state lines–not all the economic activity of the nation)

This is not the original intent of the Commerce clause. It was simply to allow Congress to direct ( or 'regulate') shipments from foreign countries to various ports in the States in order to spread the monies collected from taxes on incoming goods among the several States.

Mr. MADISON was surprised that any gentleman should return to the clauses which had already been discussed. He begged the gentleman to read the clauses which gave the power of exclusive legislation, and he might see that nothing could be done without the consent of the states. With respect to the supposed operation of what was denominated the sweeping clause, the gentleman, he said, was mistaken; for it only extended to the enumerated powers. Should Congress attempt to extend it to any power not enumerated, it would not be warranted by the clause. As to the restriction in the clause under consideration, it was a restraint on the exercise of a power expressly delegated to Congress; namely, that of regulating commerce with foreign nations.
Elliot's Debates , Volume 3, page 455 - U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 – 1875
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=003/lled003.db&recNum=466&itemLink=?%230030467&linkText=1

The federal government having any authority inside the States proper and outside the strict wordage contained in the Constitution is a concept of 'modern' government, not the Intent of the Founders.

63 posted on 04/13/2014 6:19:35 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

The first time around they were only suppose to modify the Articles of Confederation, but we got a new constitution.
You want what now?


64 posted on 04/13/2014 6:20:14 PM PDT by jimfr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan

That is one heck of a post. Thank You.


65 posted on 04/13/2014 6:21:59 PM PDT by eyedigress ((zOld storm chaser from the west)/ ?s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite
Well, that’s where “Molon Labe” would enter into, wouldn’t it?

Affirmative sir.

66 posted on 04/13/2014 6:26:10 PM PDT by Mark17 (Chicago Blackhawks: Stanley Cup champions 2010, 2013. Vietnam Vet 70-71 Msgt US Air Force, retired)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

The check on a runaway convention is state ratification of proposed amendments. The argument against a CoS because it might become run away is specious. This is not to disparage the concern as I understand the fear. I also suggest that given the present circumstances and the mendacity of the political class there are only two options. Reform the government using the CoS to guarantee our freedom. Garuntee our freedom the old fashioned way.


67 posted on 04/13/2014 6:34:20 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

When Conservatives take back Colorado in November, we’ll be next on the list.

Great Assemblies this weekend at State, CD, and HD levels!


68 posted on 04/13/2014 6:34:59 PM PDT by G Larry (There's the Beef!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eyedigress
My pleasure.

The thought of anyone even tinkering with a perfectly brilliant document is nerve-wracking enough, but seeing a misinterpretation makes it downright impossible for me to stay quiet. :-)

69 posted on 04/13/2014 6:36:50 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: mabarker1

It is not fine. It cannot protect our freedom against a mendacious government. It was not written to contain the type of people we have in government. I think some sensible additions will correct things.


70 posted on 04/13/2014 6:36:59 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mabarker1
NOT NOW! THAT DOCUMENT IS JUST FINE THE WAY IT IS. THE ONLY THING LACKING IS RESPECT AND COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

A M E N!!

71 posted on 04/13/2014 6:38:11 PM PDT by urtax$@work (The only kind of memorial is a Burning memorial !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bfh333

Well stated. Thank you.


72 posted on 04/13/2014 6:41:11 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Publius

The Convention of States needs to go on a serious education campaign in every state that has a hope of joining them.


73 posted on 04/13/2014 6:54:01 PM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

The Constitution does not need to be rewritten. It needs to be followed.


74 posted on 04/13/2014 6:55:09 PM PDT by Hoodat (Democrats - Opposing Equal Protection since 1828)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th; bfh333; Hostage; Publius; Kaosinla; UriÂ’el-2012; C210N; Strawberry AZ
Thank you for the correction. I had been operating under misinformation. I should have read more closely. The convention only proposes amendments. The amendments still have to go through the same ratification process as those proposed by Congress.

Now, here are some questions:

Is it possible to keep the Convention limited only to particular amendments?

Is it possible for the Left to co-opt the convention and propose amendments of their own?

75 posted on 04/13/2014 7:06:54 PM PDT by EveningStar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dontreadthis

Correct.


76 posted on 04/13/2014 7:08:41 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar
By the basic principles of contract law, an Amendments Convention is restricted to the subject of its calling, which is enumerated by Congress when it calls the Convention, i.e. sets time and place. Congress takes the language of the petitions calling for the convention and places it in the convention call. In parliamentary terms, it becomes part of a joint resolution of Congress.

If a proposed amendment outside the legal purview of the convention is introduced, it is the duty of the presiding officer to rule such a proposal out of order and gavel down the delegate who introduces it. If the delegate appeals the decision of the chair to the floor, it is the sworn duty of the delegates not to take such a proposal up for consideration. Bottom line: the kind of runaway convention feared by so many is outside the law.

Delegates to an Amendments Convention would be chosen by the state legislatures. I see no way this could be hijacked by the Left unless the majority of legislatures were controlled by the Left.

Keep in mind that there is one absolute fail-safe. If you go back to that long pedantic opus I added to this thread about how the amendatory process works, you'll see that it would take three-fourths of the state legislatures (or state ratifying conventions, if Congress so chooses) to ratify anything out of an Amendments Convention to get it into the Constitution. In brutal math, that means that if 13 states say no to the product of a convention, that amendment is dead.

There is no chance that a convention would agree to repeal or weaken the 2nd Amendment, and there is absolutely no chance that 38 states would ratify such foolishness.

77 posted on 04/13/2014 7:19:31 PM PDT by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: EveningStar

Bogus.

Congress can propose and pass Constitutional amendments any time. What if Congress decided to “rewrite” the whole Constitution?!?!?!?

A Convention of the States can no more do that then Congress can.

And ANY amendment proposed by the Convention of the States must go through exactly the same ratification process that all amendments have gone through in the past.

Others have already said the same thing—but it cannot be said enough, until people stop publishing the same old lies.


78 posted on 04/13/2014 7:19:40 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
Delegates met to reform the Articles of Confederation.

They did so not because they were a "runaway" convention, but because the states AUTHORIZED them to meet for that purpose. Again: The original Constitutional convention was NOT a "runaway" convention.

79 posted on 04/13/2014 7:25:45 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Antihero101607; Repeal The 17th
Call me a radical or a crazy man but I have an idea. How about we try out these amendments that we already have in place before we or alter or further amend the Constitution?

I believe I am not alone in thinking we "tried out" the 17th long enough and can repeal it right away.

80 posted on 04/13/2014 7:26:07 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-115 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson