Posted on 07/17/2014 11:53:03 AM PDT by dignitasnews
As the November 2014 elections draw closer, Republicans are fixated on taking control of the Senate and Democrats find themselves focused on picking out china patterns for a presumptive Hillary Clinton inaugural ball in 2017, conservatives should consider the fact that a Constitutional Convention is very much within reach in 2015. Once the votes are counted, the Republican Party may just control the needed number of statehouses across the country to invoke the rarely discussed provision set in Article V the US Constitution which requires Congress to call a convention of states to propose amendments. Better still for conservatives, the numbers just might be available to get more than a few of these passed. As an extra bonus, Congress would be obligated to call the convention and hold no power to limit its scope.
Article V of the Constitution provides two methods in which a constitutional convention may be called for. The first states that should two-thirds of both houses of Congress find themselves in agreement on a given issue, an amendment may be called. This of course, in the wisdom of the framers, is a very difficult prospect particularly given the current political climate. The second, however, is more realistic option in our times and as one surveys the political map on the state level, a viable option in 2015. In addition to the congressional option, should two-thirds of the states apply for a convention, Congress "shall call a convention proposing amendments."
Article V
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; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. Because the constitutional convention method has never been called there are plenty of questions in regards to the logistics and procedure. That said, this was originally to be the only process in which the Constitution may be amended. It was only after a delegation led by Alexander Hamilton argued that Congress too should have the power to do so under certain circumstances. It was then proposed by James Madison to remove the States power to propose amendments, until George Mason voiced his opposition to this plan, arguing that if the national government were to ever become oppressive, the void of a state process would render the people helpless. Thus, the two-thirds options was worked drafted and approved.
The latest legitimate attempt of the state method was the Balanced Budget Amendment. This was a long and drawn-out process in which North Dakota first applied for the amendment in 1975, while Missouri became the 32nd state in 1983, but it lost momentum just when on the cusp of victory. Speed in politics is important and although it may be idealistic to believe a variety of states can accord with equal swiftness, given their differences in personality and procedure, it is a potentiality of such unique importance it is the duty of conservatives to organize and prepare to apply the needed pressure to conservative leaders within the various states to make this a priority and drive the debate. In the modern age of communication, there are less logistical hurdles to overcome and no legitimate reason this can not be accomplished in under 24 months. Many within conservative circles have advocated for such a direction, a leading voice in this movement being radio-host and writer Mark Levin.
But to even get there we need the numbers. Although statehouse races garners far less attention than the House or Senate, it is on the state house level where the Tea Party influence has been most pronounced and their success has been key to the GOP’s current dominance in this arena. And because a Constitutional Convention is a state-driven process, conservatives will have greater representation. In the drive to thirty-four states, conservatives have good reason to engage in key races on a state level. To date, Republicans hold full control of 26 state houses, compared to only 18 under Democrat control. Five states are split between the state legislatures and state Senates, while Nebraska holds non-partisan elections for these offices, although this is widely considered “Republican country.”
What has Democratic Party officials particularly nervous is not just the race for the US Senate, but the very real possibility that Republicans, led by the insurgent Tea Party movement, will emerge from the primary season even stronger and together with establishment candidates will sweep to victory in a number of contested state house seats and have an insurmountable majority following November battles. Democrats are in danger of losing their slim majorities in eight key states, particularly West Virginia, Nevada and Colorado. Among the five states currently with a split in party majorities Kentucky, Iowa and New Hampshire appear to be leaning toward a GOP takeover. Should just these six states move over to the Republican column, they would hold full control of 32 state governments, with Nebraska giving them a virtual 33rd given their voting tendencies. This leaves seven states in which a lone upset moves one more state into the GOP column or agree to debate, discuss and vote on amendments to the constitution on a variety of issues of sincere concern to the American people.
Should these numbers become a reality, conservatives will have the opportunity to truly open up the national debate on issues ranging from abortion, to guaranteeing the integrity of our elections, illegal immigration and an overhaul of our legal immigration system, taxation, health care as well as Constitutional rights as related to both free-exercise of religious liberty and self-defense. While the American public at large is often split on these issues, the Progressive-left opposition on these position are largely centered in urban strongholds on both coasts and New England. Should the 34 needed states file applications and amendments are then proposed, three-fourths of the states will need to ratify. That means 50.01 percent of the people within states need to agree to the measure. Taking another look at he map, if crafted properly there seems to be little that the Progressive elites of New York, Chicago, Los Angeles or San Francisco can do about it.
Progressive-liberalism has been able to infect our republic mainly due to the disproportionate power and influence of these media centers on our culture and the national discussion. As such, power has increasingly found it center in Washington DC. at the expense of individual liberty. Conservatives find themselves with a unique opportunity to restore "power to the people" without the obstruction of both the liberal intelligentsia and the feckless nature of Congress. With a strong turnout of conservatives in a handful of Republican leaning states, a Constitutional Convention is very much within reach.
By Paul M Winters Editor in Chief Dignitas News Service
Sources:
NationalArchives HarvardLaw USConstitution CNSNews MarkLevinCNSInterviewVideo PJMedia (via YouTube)
How about we just overthrow DC and reset the Constitution we have?
Exactly.
The GOPE could win a majority of both houses of Congress and I doubt we see any real election reform and all that other stuff.
Many people are unaware that the Tea Party tsunami of 2010 effected statehouses more than Congress.
In 2014 the ground game for statehouses is equally as important as the GOP taking control of the Senate because a GOPe led by the likes of McConnell is no different in outcome than a Senate led by Reid.
For me this is one of those might regret what you wish for items. Since this has not happened before there is question about whether there are any limits on what could be proposed at a convention. So there is the possibility of tons of amendments around positive rights; right to free stuff. Also how about doing away with the Senate or the Electoral College. Would you trust a convention filled with GOPe types?
Clean out ALL fedgov employees and institute a lifetime ban on them.
That would give us about a 20 yr breather.
Nailed it.
BUMP
There are certainly pitfalls, but remember any proposed amendment must still be ratified by 38 states. And there is far more of a likelihood that this coalition could be found for conservative proposals than anything the left might propose.
I would recommend reading the following on the process of such a convention arguing that states, not congress would have the primary authority in such a convention.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No3_Rogersonline.pdf
The leaders of the Assembly of States are proceeding methodically in setting rules and procedures.
Given their performance to date and the numbers of conservative states, I will lose no sleep.
So?
They still need 2/3rds of the states to approve them.
No different than all of the ones proposed in congress every year.
What executive branch outrage would move you to support a convention to propose amendments?
That is correct.
However, there are structural "limits" in that what is proposed at the convention must first be passed by the convention. Then, what is passed by the convention must be ratified by the states.
One would hope that the limits on what is proposed results from the delegates' assumptions on what proposals are likely to pass, and what proposals are considered extreme.
-PJ
My preferences for the convention:
- repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.
- Taxes to be assessed on each State by representative apportionment
- Limit the scope of all federal laws and administrative rulings to only those enumerated powers in the constitution
- Prohibit any canon, law, codex or other legal ruling other than the Constitution, ratified treaties, and US court cases. Establish that US Constitution and bill of rights is supreme to all other laws and treaties.
- limit the commerce clause effect to only those goods and services that cross state boundaries
- Hold congressional, presidential and secretary salaries in an escrow account if a budget is not pasted by Oct 1st for the following fiscal year.
- Establish that life and person-hood begins at conception.
There are others but that would be a good start.
At this moment, we trust unconstitutional executive government controlled by fascist types.
Calling a Constitutional Convention would be just what the Left is looking for, since this would dominate it and, thereby, ruin forever our federal republic. If we can’t even beat a outright Commie and keep electing hundreds of Democrats to Congress how would it be expected, in the real world, to stop them from running the CC? Polls have shown today’s Americans would not even ratify the Bill of Rights.
Article V ping!
As a side note to this thread, please consider the following. Although I have a list of things that I’d like to see amended to the Constitution, the basic problem with the “Constitution,” imo, is the following. Generations of parents have been negligent in making sure that their children are being taught why the Constitution exists in the first place, to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
So an arguably easier remedy for the nation’s self-inflicted big federal government problems is the following. The states need to amend their constitutions to require that children are taught the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers as the Founding States had intended for those powers to be understood.
In fact, given that the Constitution’s rules are arguably no more complicated than a child’s board game, I suggest that states not allow students to graduate from high school or be issued a driver’s license if they cannot pass a basic constitutional law test, just a few true / false questions which stress the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers.
The bircher website says much the same. A few months ago, I visited about a dozen prominent lefty sites. There was zero mention of Article V to amend the constitution.
The Left has corrupted our constitution quite well these past 80 years without a convention. It isn't in their interest.
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.