Posted on 01/22/2015 12:34:13 PM PST by cotton1706
After movement already from 10 states in the early weeks of legislative sessions this year, one conservative group believes an Article 5 convention to amend the Constitution can be achieved by the end 2015.
Resolutions have been introduced in Arizona, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, South Carolina, Virginia and Wyoming to support fiscal restraint and limit the scope of federal power.
Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey gives his state-of-the-state address in the House of Representatives at the Arizona Capitol, Monday, Jan. 12, 2015, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin) Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey gives his state-of-the-state address in the House of Representatives at the Arizona Capitol, Monday, Jan. 12, 2015, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)
Still, this particular Article 5 movement would need 31 additional states to pass resolutions – joining Alaska, Florida and Georgia, which passed resolutions last year calling for a convention of the states to address broad issues on restraining the federal government.
The Republican wave in state legislatures in the last election could help, said Mark Meckler, co-founder of the Convention of States Project.
“It’s an ambitious goal that if you asked me last year I wouldn’t have been as certain, but that was before November 2014,” Meckler told TheBlaze. “Now, Republicans control 31 state legislatures. There has been a radical sea change at the state level.”
The Convention of the States Project is a separate effort from one to call a convention specifically to pass a balanced budget amendment. Though 24 states have passed resolutions to approve a balanced budget amendment, the resolutions – some of which date back to the 1980s – are not identical, Meckler said.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
The left is far too weak in the states to do any damage in a Convention of the States. They do not have any hope in such a matter. They can vilify the convention through their propaganda system and national politicians, but they can’t control these state-led activities. The states, even leftist states, see a lot of appeal in bringing back power to the state legislatures. It would be an effort that the national politicians would feel weak in the face of.
Thank you for detailing the con con process for us.
I do not trust the outcome of any alteration of the constitution by this genetation’s legislators.
They have proven again and again that they are only motivated by their own self interest.
They lie, misrepresent, and do not care about the future of our country or its citizens.
Bills always bear contrary results compared to their benevolent name, ie: Patriot Act, Affordable Care Act, NDAA, No Child Left Behind, 2015 Border Security - All deliberately crafted to actually diminish national and individual security and liberty.
So no, I don’t trust any of our legislators to improve anything, especially the US Constitution.
We don’t need to amend our constitution, at all.
We must amend all of our leadership!
Wow, wish I had that confidence in our power and in our enemies weakness. Actions taken by Obama, with almost nary an organized opposition don’t give me much comfort.
Be very careful what you wish for...a Constitutional Convention could be a MAJOR disaster.....with 50% of the population not even paying federal taxes and the gibmedats in enormous numbers.........be veeeeeeeeery careful!!
“Actions taken by Obama, with almost nary an organized opposition don’t give me much comfort.”
Obama is a national politician with some connections to Illinois. He doesn’t have great power in any other state. Even Dems in those states are out for their own power and only have interest in national Dems to the degree they can enhance their local power, as in DNC funding support, for example. We have to evaluate this at the state level. One particular weakness of the Dems is their voter base is concentrated in urban centers, mostly on the coasts. Even in states like NY, they are a minority in much of the state and it isn’t odd that Dems haven’t controlled state legislators in some states you think are all-Dem.
I’m convinced that Congress will never call for an Article V convention, even if the required number of states petition for same. If Congress perceives that there is a substantial prospect that powers of the federal government might be curtailed by such a convention, it would simply spin endless reasons to deny establishment of a convention. These might take any number of forms: argument that some of the state’s petitions were too old, or not identically worded, or that some states’ petitions have been repealed or amended, etc. etc. etc. Even if these claims are specious, Congress will not budge, ever.
What would the states do in the place of such intransigence? Sue? I have little confidence in the Supreme Court’s willingness to honestly deal with such a suit, particularly if it was likely that an Article V convention might curtail court powers and judicial tenure. Again, our robed tyrants would be able to find any number of grounds for such a refusal (e.g., lack of standing) including simply finding grounds emanating from the penumbra of some constitutional provision or another.
Advocates of substantial constitutional change through an Article V convention may face the prospect of simply convening a convention, even absent a Congressional call. Could the federal government physically prevent such a convention? It could and probably would refuse to acknowledge the results, even if an amended or rewritten constitution submitted by the convention was ratified by 35 or 40 states. Would the states supporting the new charter be prepared to tell the existing government “So long, it’s been good to know ya’” and prepare to deal with the consequences? That didn’t work out so well a century and a half ago. Maybe this time would be different, maybe not.
I will note, however, that there is American precedent for this. The convention which adopted our current United States constitution and submitted it to the thirteen original states for ratification essentially ignored the Articles of Confederation which it replaced.
Most FReepers are aware of these links, but I post anyway for review and for people new to Article V. It is our responsibility to make Article V the most understood aspect of the US Constitution.
Most state legislatures reconvened this month. Call or write your state representative and senator to get them on the Article V stagecoach! (Contact info below)
Convention of States - Alabama Way to go Alabama! A good introduction.
The Case for an Article V Convention. Fantastic explanation of Article V convention to the Mass State Legislature.
I would recommend watching the above videos first and then:
Convention of States Lots of information here.
Call a Convention A call for a Convention of States
Article V Project to Restore Liberty Another good source.
Convention of States model Resolution
A Summary of Mark Levin’s Proposed Amendments by Jacquerie
Chapter 1 of Mark Levin’s Book, The Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin, Constitution Article V, and the Liberty Amendments
Rep. Bill Taylor introduces a Convention of States
List of Mark Levin You Tube Videos
Mark Levin Article V, Liberty Amendments youtube video hub
Three hour video of C-Span interview with Mark Levin
Mark Levin’s ALEC Speech, Dec 4, 2014
Gaining Steam? Nearly 100 Lawmakers Descend on Mount Vernon to Talk Convention of States The beginning.
Mark Levin’s “Liberty Amendments” Sean Hannity Special
Convention to Propose Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Other Way to Amend the Constitution: The Article V Constitutional Convention Amendment Process
Friends of Article V Convention Links
Ulysses at the Mast: Democracy, Federalism, and the Sirens' Song of the Seventeenth Amendment by Jay Bybee. Repeal the 17th
Article V Handbook - for State Legislators An important resource.
State Legislators Article V Caucus State Legislators, Join up at this site!
Send this list of links to your State Representatives and Senators here: Contact your State Legislators.
Sample Letter to state Representatives regarding the Convention of States Project and also, Talking Points.
Excellent Article V Letter to a State Assemblyman by Jacquerie
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke.
Let’s all work together to get this going.
It’s not a Constitutional Convention. It is an article V Convention of the States. It’s different.
Mark Levin has written an excellent book that covers this called “The Liberty Amendments”. It needs to be read and understood before you make decisions about what you think this is. It really did an excellent job of explaining it for me and eased any of the fears I had. The bar is set very high and it would be nigh impossible for a bunch of liberals to take it over.
It is probably the only solution we have left to save our Republic aside from another armed revolution.
You can also think of it this way. The lefist nuts have already taken over the country and trashed our Constitution ignoring the laws and the intent of our founders. What more do we have to lose?
With the GOP in the condition it is now, our side will end up capitulating and trading controls on executive power for the repealing of the 2nd Amendment. All the lefties really want from this is the end of our gun rights.
The other evening, Philip Hamburger, who wrote the book on administrative law, said he would add only one one-word amendment to the Constitution: REALLY! He’s right. It’s all there already.
Nice goal. What's the plan?
Not true. The Constitution was unanimously ratified. Or was there some other illegality you were speaking of? Is our current Constitution illegal and illegitimate?
Brutally shame Every damn one of our politicians in a spring-up-out-of-nowhere non-politically aligned campaign.
Kinda like the Concord Coalition of the late 1980’s TV PSA’s raised alarm about the Nat’l debt increasing. That campaign in part spawned Gramm-Rudman which was supposed reign in spending / debt if only congress and the fed abided by the rules and sane monetary / fiscal policy.
Something has to be done.
Shame needs to make a comeback in a simple easy to identify way.
Ross Perot without the hypocrisy / eccentricity.
I’d recruit John Stossel and Judge Nepolitano as spokespersons. Very respectable and they brilliantly criticize by posing a stream of embarrassing questions.
Help
When the states were invited to send representatives to consider alterations, the resulting convention quickly discarded the notion of drafting amendments to the Articles and instead, and in secret, set to writing an entirely new constitution, essentially creating a new form of government.
When the Constitution was submitted in 1787, Congress initially debated censoring the delegates for exceeding their authority, among other ways by ignoring the Article's requirement that alterations be approved by every state. The notion of censure was soon dropped, and the proposed constitution was sent to the states complete with Article VII, which required only nine of the thirteen states for ratification. The Constitution also specified state ratification conventions as opposed to ratification by state legislatures as required by the Articles, as the Constitution's drafters feared that state legislatures would paralyze the process with numerous amendments.
After Delaware became the first state to ratify, other states started falling in line, and New Hampshire became the ninth in June of 1788. There was considerable fear at the time that the union formed by New Hampshire's ratification would be unworkable, as two key populous states, New York and Virginia, were not yet on board. Those two states did after bitter debate eventually ratify, as well as the remaining two (North Carolina and Rhode Island). Rhode Island, the last, was threatened with being treated as a foreign nation by the new United States, and ratified (by two votes) on May 29, 1790.
Fascinating times, those must have been.
Granny- I do not understand how a liberal can believe and condone leftists agendas, but it is beyond my comprehension how "conservatives" on this site just do not understand Article V. EVERYONE claiming to be a Constitutional Conservtive that has any doubt about Article V should read Mark's book or research on their own. We have many brilliant FReepers that have explained it here well, over and over and over. I must conclude that these people my consider themselves conservative, but Constitutionalists they are not.
I just got off the phone with a caller from the Midwest asking me to contact my N.J. state assemblyman and ask that he vote for ACR-149, which would apply to Congress for a limited constitutional convention to limit corrupting influence of money in politics and overturn Citizens United decision and related cases.
I searched it under ACR-149 NJ and looked it over. But then I looked at the sponsorship. Every one is a Democrat! That leads me to ask, what’s in it for the RAT party? Oh, that’s right...if the C.U. decision was overturned it would be simple to disguise the free speech rights (read: DOLLARS) of their companies and corporate backers as concerned citizens’ donations and opinions, and would hamper Republican fund raising from similar sources (since we don’t lie nearly as often or as well).
Am I missing anything?
Then why are a whole passel of RAT NJ assemblymen co-sponsoring a bill join the move to do it? (NJ ACR-149)
I smell a RAT!
Yes, you are missing something. Any such amendment, just like all the others, would have to be approved by the legislatures of 38 states in a certain period of time or it would expire.
“Rather a dangerous liberty than a peaceful servitude.”
Remember that the Office of the Archivist of the United States tabulates applications in a spreadsheet by state (row) and subject (column). New Jersey, should it vote for an Amendments Convention on overturning Citizens United, would not have its application tabulated with those states, like Georgia, that have applied for a convention to discuss Mark Levin's amendments.
It's a case of apples and oranges.
I’m suspicious of anything that has so much Rat backing.
Also when the principal defense of the movement seems to be “Don’t worry. It will never pass.”
The language of New Jersey’s application is dedicated to overturning Citizens United.
Literal utopia for democrats and leftist nationwide is the overturning of “Citizens United”.
In one respect it puts dems and blue states off the table on Article V. To say they are ate up with citizens united is to not really grasp how important it is to them to be able to shut off the voice of the right.
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.