Posted on 05/14/2015 3:31:12 PM PDT by cotton1706
We have great news from Austin!
The Texas House passed the Convention of States resolution (HJR 77) today by a vote of 80-62!
We couldn't be prouder of our team in Texas -- they responded to our call to action, overwhelming the Texas legislature with calls and emails of support. This victory would have been impossible without their dedication, patriotism, and tenacity.
Next our resolution will move to the Texas Senate. Be looking for a specific call to action within the next few days explaining exactly who to contact and what to say!
(Excerpt) Read more at conventionofstates.com ...
No, it’s 3 down, 31 to go. The Texas Senate must apply for the count to make 4.
“...Now, the US Constitution must be replaced...”
-
Oh, so you are one of “THOSE” guys.
Good bye.
> “The point is nobody has done this since the original Convention.”
I don’t believe that is true at all. This is not a Constitutional Convention or Con-Con. Many liars like to call it a Con-Con.
The original Convention was called to strengthen the central government, to create a new governing document to replace the Articles of Confederation. It was never called by Artivle V because Article V did not even exist.
It’s important to understand that Article V is only about Congress or the States proposing AMENDMENTS. It does not allow for a new Constitution.
There have been very near completions of Article V in the early 1900s. The States were almost to the point of proposing amendments under Article V when Congress persuaded them to let Congress do it for example in the case of the 17th Amendment.
Today state legislators are more trustworthy than members of Congress to propose amendments. Congress will never propose amendments that take away its power. That is why it was wise for the Founders to allow the States to propose amendments because they saw a time when Congress would try to have all the power to themselves.
As for your claim that the courts will attack an amendment ratified by States under Article V, take a look at this next example illustration that shows how the power of Article V can be unlocked by the States to restore federalism thereby restoring liberty and saving the Republic. This illustration condenses several of Mark Levin’s suggested Liberty Amendments and also incorporates valuable input from concerned Freepers.
************************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States and to restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
************************************************
Section 1.
A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2.
Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.
Section 3.
Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void.
************************************************
The courts have no authority to attack the above when fully ratified by 38 states.
Texas Senate is even more conservative than the House. Expect it’s passage.
This is a convention of states. The state legislatures would approve, or not , whatever is agreed upon for vote. Not the congress.
We need 38 states to amend the Constitution, that's the goal. Regarding 3 vs 4 down, I was just being optimistic that the Senate is on board, seeing as it's Texas that just passed it in the House - so yes you are correct about that little detail.
And remember, an Amendments Convention has proposal rights only. Not disposal rights nor ratification rights. To see the process, check Post #11.
Way to go, Texas!
We need more states. We need volunteers in Arizona, Wisconsin, others.
And taking no action pretty much ensures our continued decline as a free nation - inaction due to fear is not a viable option; it's a cop-out.
You may have to step aside and let patriots do there thing.
How?
Once the left realizes that Article V is inevitable, they will get on board with it and begin proposing their own leftist proposals (think STRONG 2nd Amendment restrictions, loose immigration, etc.). At the same time, the right is making their own proposals.
So, for the sake of discussion, we'll say that, in the end, the left has 5 amendments proposed as does the right. Now, the right knows full well that, if they don't allow any of the leftist proposals to go to the States for ratification, they will be hard pressed to get their amendments out as well, making the entire process and total waste of time. So, the right does what the right does best - in the name of "bipartisanship", the right bends over and votes to allow some or all of the leftist proposals to go to the states, simply so that they know that the right's proposals will also go to the states.
Now, the amendments are out to the States. The general argument is that most State legislatures are heavily R, which would seem to give the advantage to the right's amendments, right? Wrong. This thinking makes a couple major assumptions:
1. The State GOP's are much more Conservative than the National, and unlike the federal legislature, the States will stand firm for Conservatives, and
2. There will be NO "bipartisanship" across every single state.
Now, anyone with even the slightest amount of common sense knows full well that, State or Federal, the GOP ALWAYS bends over in the name of "bipartisanship". This is how the left wins a LOT of arguments against the right, and the morons on the right fall for it, every. single. time.
So, once again, we are left with the prospect that one of two things will happen:
1. The GOP will do what the GOP does and bends to the will of the leftists, allowing some leftist proposals to be ratified with the notion that doing so will guarantee the right's proposals also get ratified, or
2. NO amendments are ratified, once again, bringing back the fact that the whole entire thing was a complete waste of time.
Anyone who actually believes that the GOP will get all or most of what they want, and the left gets nothing, is only fooling themselves. The truth is, the pro-Article V camp is making this sound as though it will be all sunshine and roses for Conservatives. Go back through history and tell me, with a straight face, that you really believe that.
Why would the left bother when, with one more vote on the SCOTUS they get what they want anyway?
"The GOP will do what the GOP does and bends to the will of the leftists"
In Washington, I agree, but not in the states. We will never be stronger than we are today.
"NO amendments are ratified, once again, bringing back the fact that the whole entire thing was a complete waste of time"
Waste of who's time? Mine? Don't worry about that. You waste your time your way and I'll waste my time my way. If this is the worst that can happen it seems worth trying to me!
"Anyone who actually believes that the GOP will get all or most of what they want, and the left gets nothing, is only fooling themselves."
But that is exactly what the left is afraid of!
Better
Isn’t it amazing how much effort we have to do to legally change the Constitution, and how effortlessly the “President” and the people in the government violate it all the time?
Post of the Day!
I don’t see anything that allows the states to request a single issue convention. Article V states:
“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem
it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of atification may be proposed by the Congress ... .”
I have read the post and replied by quoting Article V, which says nothing about a single issue convention.
I know exactly what I am talking about. I have been an attorney for 39 years and have read greatly about the real Constitution, not the one the federal courts make up. Article states, in pertinent part:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem
it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures
of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions
in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress
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.