Posted on 11/01/2014 12:13:09 PM 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 GOPs 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)
For later study.
My only objection to an Article V convention of the states is that the feral government simply ignores the constitution now. Why would they not just ignore any new amendments?
Welcome to FR.
Excellent article and thank you for posting it entirely.
Again, welcome.
Valid concern. That said, if we are to invoke Article V, Id rather it come from the right than the left.
Thanks Vendome.
If we simply repealed 16 and 17, most of our problems would vanish. Add in All Laws Shall Apply to All People Equally without exception, and it might spell liberty.
BUMP for later...
Well, if the new amendments posed mandatory punishments for their violation that would make some difference — here's four amendments I'd propose:
Tax Reform Amendment | Fiscal Responsibility Amendment |
---|---|
Section I No tax, federal or state, shall ever be withheld from the wages of a worker of any citizen of either. Section II No property shall be seized for failure to pay taxes until after conviction in a jury trial; the right of the jury to nullify (and thereby forgive) this debt shall never be questioned or denied. Section III The second amendment is hereby recognized as restricting the power of taxation, both federal and state, therefore no tax (or fine) shall be laid upon munitions or the sale thereof. Section IV The seventh amendment is also hereby recognized, and nothing in this amendment shall restrict the right of a citizen to seek civil redress. Section V No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever exceed 10%. Section VI No income tax levied by the federal government, the several States, or any subdivision of either shall ever apply varying rates to those in its jurisdiction. Section VII No retroactive or ex post facto tax (or fee) shall ever be valid. Section VIII The congress may not delegate the creation of any tax or fine in any way. Section IX No federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent shall ever be exempt from any tax, fine, or fee by virtue of their position. Section X Any federal employee, representative, senator, judge, justice or agent applying, attempting to apply, or otherwise causing the application of an ex post facto, retrospective, or retroactive law shall, upon conviction, be evicted from office and all retirement benefits forfeit. |
Section I The power of Congress to regulate the value of the dollar is hereby repealed. Section II The value of the Dollar shall be one fifteen-hundredth avoirdupois ounce of gold of which impurities do not exceed one part per thousand. Section III To guard against Congress using its authority over weights and measures to bypass Section I, the ounce in Section II is approximately 28.3495 grams (SI). Section IV The Secretary of the Treasury shall annually report the gold physically in its possession; this report shall be publicly available. Section V The power of the Congress to assume debt is hereby restricted: the congress shall assume no debt that shall cause the total obligations of the United States to exceed one hundred ten percent of the amount last reported by the Secretary of the Treasury. Section VI Any government agent, officer, judge, justice, employee, representative, or congressman causing gold to be confiscated from a private citizen shall be tried for theft and upon conviction shall: a. be removed from office (and fired, if an employee), b. forfeit all pension and retirement benefits, c. pay all legal costs, and d. restore to the bereaved twice the amount in controversy. Section VII The federal government shall assume no obligation lacking funding, neither shall it lay such obligation on any of the several States, any subdivision thereof, or any place under the jurisdiction of the United States. All unfunded liabilities heretofore assumed by the United States are void. Section VIII The federal government shall make all payments to its employees or the several states in physical gold. Misappropriation, malfeasance and/or misfeasance of funds shall be considered confiscation. |
Commerce Clause Amendment | Senate Reform Amendment |
Section I The federal government shall directly subsidize no product or industry whatsoever, saving the promotion the progress of Science and useful Arts. Section II The federal government shall never prescribe nor proscribe what the several states teach. Neither the federal government nor the several states shall ever deny the right of parents to teach and instruct their children as they see fit. Section III The congress may impose tariffs, excise taxes, and customs duties on anything imported or exported, provided that they are applied uniformly and in no manner restrict, subvert, or circumvent the second amendment. Section IV No law may impose prohibitions of any sort on the commerce between the several states due to the item itself. |
Section I The seventeenth amendment is hereby repealed. Section II The several states may provide by law the means by which their senators may be removed or replaced. |
Big changes are always bought by loss of support, and Republicans won't have enough of a margin to secure major changes, even if they wanted to.
0.14393 mol AU.
That's why we shouldn't frame this as a Republican/Democrat issue, but as justice/injustice issues — do you really think that the majority of Americans approve of the IRS's political targeting, or [if they knew about it] their policy of property seizure w/o trial? Do you think that the majority of Americans are happy with the NSA's domestic espionage? Or the continual unencumbered accumulation of public debt?
All of these can be framed in terms of justice and eliminating the possibility of corruption by limiting government's powers in certain arenas.
I like them.
Or a Mitch McConnell, for that matter.
Thank you — I’m working on putting them into a booklet-form along with reasoning/justifications, hopefully the result will be decent.
(Would you like a ping to it when I’m done?)
read
“conservatives” will be the minority in any real convention
Do you think that if these were passed an AG would ignore them?
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.