It is time for a Convention of the States

Absolute Rights Blog ^ | 12/17/2014 | Posted by: Jon Dougherty

[SleeperCatcher]

We have some bad news for American conservatives: The leaders of our party, the once Grand Old Party, are trying to figure out a way to win elections without us, and if or when they do, they will abandon us like yesterday’s trash.

If you have any question about this, you need not look any further than this National Journal story from yesterday, reporting that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has “announced” on his Facebook page that he is “actively exploring” a presidential bid in 2016. Spoiler alert: Jeb Bush is not your dad’s conservative.

We’re not sure if “actively exploring” a bid is really much different than “considering a run” or “weighing his options.”

But what we are sure of is that Jeb Bush is trying to figure out a way to win the Republican presidential nomination without the conservative base. We are sure that he is the preferred candidate of the GOP establishment, and that is because he is the preferred candidate of the GOP donor class...

And, he’s another Bush.

All of these things are not supported by the Republican Party's conservative base. But that doesn't matter to the GOP leadership and the GOP donor class.

What also doesn't matter to either the Republican leadership or the donors they are beholden to is the fact that, thanks to conservatives, the Republican Party just experienced a wave election, resulting in a record number of GOP congressional lawmakers come January. state legislatures around the country, too.

So, what are conservatives to do when the leaders of their chosen party have become nearly indistinguishable from liberal Democrats? Vote? Write letters and emails? Make phone calls? Stay at home and refuse to participate? Withhold our financial support?

[JOAT]

Given that everyone in your opinion is rotten, what is the solution, the route to possible restoration of freedom?

I like some of Greysard's solutions.

Mine is dreadfully simple: ONE TERM.

No career politicians at all.

You may never be re-elected to any post, even dog catcher.

The concept of committees existing where my representative has less leverage than yours, simply because yours has been there longer is garbage.

These turds need flushing every 4-6 years.

Power is TOO corrupting for even the purest to abstain from abusing it.

After a generation of this, MAYBE we could talk about revisiting the Constitution.

Maybe.

[Jacquerie]

To achieve your goals requires a state convention to amend the constitution.

[nathanbedford]

You quite properly asks to turn the coin over and see what is on the other face. It is quite true that it will be difficult for conservatives to amend the Constitution, although less difficult by far than for leftists. I wrote a reply considering this problem on August 3 which I reproduce below.

I think the Reference to a "Black Swan" event being necessary to find public support for an article 5 movement is still very real. Every day the time for saving our constitutional Republic grows one day shorter. If a crunch comes I have no doubt that the left will be quite prepared and even eager for a putsch while conservatives seek bunkers. I think it would be much better if we were ready with an Article V solution.

Here is that August reply:

One thing is crystal clear, Washington other cannot or will not reform itself. Article V is concededly a thin even a desperate hope but it at least it offers the promise, however remote, of reform because it is conducted outside of Washington.

The numbers are admittedly daunting, 34 states needed to propose amendments, a recalcitrant Congress to accede to the application and actually "call" a convention, and the legislatures or the conventions of 38 states agreeing to ratify the amendments. Indeed, except for Nebraska both the House and Senate of these 38 states must approve if Congress elects ratification to be conducted by the legislatures rather than state conventions.

So the bad news is also the good news. Even though Republicans control far more legislative houses than do Democrats, they do not have enough to make 34 and certainly not enough to ratify with 38. So the prospect of reform in view of these numbers is daunting.

But the good news is that the Democrats are even less able to persuade the legislatures to ratify any amendment they might propose -putting aside the likelihood that they would not be able to propose anything in a convention because the authorizing legislation from the states would not permit it. In any event, there is really no practical danger of a "runaway" convention producing an unpalatable result much less a result that would be ratified by 75 of 99 legislative bodies the great majority of whom are controlled by Republicans.

My view is that the danger of doing nothing clearly outweighs the remote danger of a "runaway convention" or the fanciful idea that Republican legislators in the in 75 legislative bodies would ratify such an amendment. I note the resistance on the right seems to be coming from gun rights groups, especially including the NRA, Phyllis Schaffly and the John Birch Society. I believe that the Second Amendment groups are exaggerating the danger beyond all proportion to reality.

If we do nothing we will continue on the path we are on which in my view is a path to destruction. In this sense the bad news, again, is also the good news. I believe it will require some sort of "Black Swan" event such as financial crisis, a war, or some utterly unforeseen situation which stirs the country to take action. We are losing our liberty and we are losing our solvency and we are doing so at an accelerating rate. The risks of doing nothing are unacceptable and events might well bring the people to see that.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” So If the government (representatives voted for) are disobeying the Constitution, how then can added amendments fix things?”

Intelligent question, and I don’t have the answer.

[JOAT]

To achieve your goals requires a state convention to amend the constitution.

Which is far too dangerous.

The way to start would be at a state level.

Creating a fabric of state-level laws constricting one's own state to one term as the norm for all political offices.

Once that meme is fully inculcated at the state level, the cultural push could start on fed politicians, at first as voluntary campaign pledges.

There is no way the feds will voluntarily relinquish their non-Constitutional powers.

After broken promises, and only if the majority of states had adopted one term only, could a States Convention be contemplated.

The point is, the country is currently so devolved from the original, Constitutional format, not to mention morality, trusting state level bureaucrats to 'fix' things would be a huge gamble.

Do you actually trust career politicians to do the 'right' thing?

If so, you may want to consider moving away from large cities if you're wrong.

[Jacquerie]

Post #22 addresses your question.

[caww]

....”Post #22 addresses your question”....

Not satisfactory because the State convention, though it bypasses Congress, would purpose ammendments which changes the laws but does not address the issue of not “obeying” the constitution... it simply changes it.

[Jacquerie]

Please read my well-received vanity post rather than respond to the title.

[zzeeman]

If we do nothing we will continue on the path we are on which in my view is a path to destruction. In this sense the bad news, again, is also the good news. I believe it will require some sort of "Black Swan" event such as financial crisis, a war, or some utterly unforeseen situation which stirs the country to take action. We are losing our liberty and we are losing our solvency and we are doing so at an accelerating rate. The risks of doing nothing are unacceptable and events might well bring the people to see that.

I am concerned that if we wait for such a Black Swan event, all hell will have broken loose, and it may be too late at that point.

In my mind, the time to act is now. The process will take a fair amount of time. As you said above, "Every day the time for saving our constitutional Republic grows one day shorter."

[servantboy777]

Yes, it is a constitutional process, this is the exact reason it will fail to come to fruition. These people don't give a damn about the constitution and they will use extra constitutional means to make sure it never happens.

For example. Why do you think we still have the same tax code/structure we've had all these years? Why is it no one....no one has begun the process of eliminating the IRS even after they proven to be a political tool to intimidate citizens? Why do we not have a call by anyone other than Paul calling to audit the Federal reserve? Why have the borders remained wide open all these years through republican and democrat admins and congresses? Why would our leaders allow the greatest transfer of wealth in world history from America/American families to a communist country that technically is our enemy?

The constitution does not matter to these people. It is power, opulent lifestyles, endless flow of cash that matters. Not even national security matters, that is unless it threatens their seat.

I am all for a convention of the states, but I just happen to think there are too many crooks in D.C. to ever realize something that would totally strip them of control. Control is their game and they are damn good at it.

[caww]

But the division of power between federal and local governments is already outlined in the national constitution....

It just seems to me there are not enough good people who want to enforce the constitution...rather it’s simply a line they weave in and out of to accomplish personal agenda’s.....not to mention what ever group think agenda they’re involved with.

I’m just not certain things are going to change even with A State Convention..but perhaps it’s the only thing left other than civil strife.

It pays to look at Egypt....they threw out the entire Muslim Brotherhood....but they had the Military behind them...and the majority of the people.

As I see it we have a minority who have their fangs in a tight grip on our country and they need to be tossed as well.....

[Jacquerie]

I’ve been writing and posting on this subject at FR for almost two years.

IF you are interested, I will provide a link or two on why the states must be returned to the senate.

Just let me know.

[SleeperCatcher]

Yes, I have worked on state-level politics, and my experience has been that those on the state level are much closer to the people and, hence, much more responsive. I can’t speak to your experiences.

Again, though, I ask with respect: What is your alternative? And if we can’t put any “faith in the mechanism” that we have been given, then have you essentially given up?

[caww]

Yes, I’m interested in those links. Thank you.

[Jacquerie]

Okay, here are a couple for starters:

Washington is divided Because it has Abandoned Federalism

Why the Framers Relied on Constitutional Structure

[Strawberry AZ]

If the Founders had allowed FEAR to cloud their judgment, we would all be speaking with a British accent and kissing the Royal Ring.

Besides trusting in the best among us, we need determination, courage and faith. A blanket condemnation of an entire generation is not only wrong and counterproductive, but it’s rather elitist. Some of us prefer to think for ourselves.

[Strawberry AZ]

The process has already begun, and state committees project that it could take from 3 - 5 years, less if people get over their fear and get on board.

[Strawberry AZ]

Unfortunately, that’s NOT a very good idea. If it were that simple, it would have been done already. All that amounts to is a reason for doing nothing.

And please inform yourself. The delegates to a Convention of States will be among the most constitutionally conservative advocates of liberty alive, and will be bound by their mandate to reduce the power and scope of the federal government, apply fiscal restraints, and impose term limits on all federal officials.

To your final point that the constitution is not being followed now, I would submit that just the opposite is true. For the most part, government adheres VERY closely to the constitution... as interpreted by the Supreme Court. An amendments convention can (and will) attempt to clarify the vague and ambiguous language that the courts use to create powers never intended by the Founders.

Please examine the actual specifics of what’s being proposed by the Citizens for Self-Governance Convention of States Project for yourself and suspend for a moment your reliance on the misinformation being spread by elitists with a vested interest in supporting the status quo.

[Publius]

Your point is well taken.

The government is following the Constitution to the letter. Unfortunately, it's the Living Constitution, the Constitution symbolized as a Tree, that they are following. This is the Constitution that changes and evolves over time and changing societal conditions, even though its actual words don't change.

[Strawberry AZ]

Exactly... and we can fix that. Identify and close the loopholes, clarify the language, limit the text to original intent.