Posted on 12/03/2014 7:36:21 PM PST by Citizen Zed
Illinois State lawmakers have joined several other states to call for a Constitutional Convention to amend the U.S. Constitution when it comes to campaign finance reform.
During debate on the House floor Wednesday, State Rep. Chapa LaVia said calls for the convention are to address campaign finance and the scope cannot go farther than that.
But outgoing State Rep. Mike Bost, who recently won an election to the U.S. House, says once the door is opened, anything is possible.
“Once you open and you do a Constitutional convention, it is not going to be and cannot be focused just on one issue, you must then open up – because it’s a Constitutional Convention – you will be dealing with the entire Constitution,” Bost said.
Bost says the danger is there could be unforeseen changes that are detrimental to the Constitutional Republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at ilnews.org ...
Article V was expressly included in one context that foresaw that Congress would never feel compelled to act against its own interests.
In that context then yes, term limits is a prime example for why Article V should be invoked.
Jacquerie-
Yes, I realize that Article V makes contains no such requirement, but from all my reading the archivist does not add, for example an Article V petition from one State on one subject with another petition from another State on a different subject. If I am wrong on this point, I would like to be corrected.
My understanding is that there is no specific time limitation on such petitions and if petitions on different subject matters were to be aggregated regardless, then perhaps there are already more than 34 pending petitions. Apparently you believe there are. But there has been no call by the Archivist.
I frankly cannot see how it would make any sense that petitions on different subjects could be aggregated. This would force states to participate in a Convention considering subjects they might be barred from considering.
Not only that, such a view plays into the hands of the alarmists who contend that once called an Article V Convention would rapidly spin out of control.
If I may say, I think yours is very much a minority opinion.
No state is required to attend a convention. No state can force the delegates of another to consider issues outside of their commissions.
Out of control? Since 1932, the Left has disemboweled the constitution. On 11/20/14 Obama repealed Article I Section 1.
Federalist 85 speaks to Article V. That is my primary source of info.
You may find this research paper of interest: Hamline Law Review.
It's been going on far longer than that, and I think it would be more accurate for you to use statist
than "left" — the simple truth is that the leadership of "the right" (Republicans) are only a little less left than the Democrats, we can see this in how they refuse to make any actual stand against the Democrats on anything — the reason I think that the evisceration has been going on longer than that is because of USSC rulings like Schenck, which says:
We admit that, in many places and in ordinary times, the defendants, in saying all that was said in the circular, would have been within their constitutional rights. […] When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight, and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.as opposed to
Amendment I(Note that Schenck is from 1919.)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hey Publius, are you going to ping these folks on your “boilerplate” information why the proposed Article V convention by the Citizens for Self-Governance is a good idea? Looks like many don’t know that.
Could you please add me to your Article V ping list?
I predict:
No convention, for the same reasons which were present going back decades; namely no agreement among 2/3 or 3/4 of states.
But it sells books.
Repeal the 16th and the 17th
I'd accept that if they consider repealing the 17th amendment as campaign finance reform.
You'd be eliminating 33 of the most expensive elections that occur every 2 years. That's about as absolute a campaign finance reform that one can get!
-PJ
These are some of Levin’s desired changes. And remember that Levin supported the feminist divorce/cohabitation push against fathers during the 1990s.
* Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment
That would allow state assembly members to get more control over Congress. Readers, are your state senators and representatives really more conservative than voters in general when it comes to regulating and spending?
* Create a more specific definition of the Commerce Clause
From what we’re seeing in political speech, I’m rightfully assuming that they want to more quickly legalize dope dealing in all of the states.
* Allow states to more easily amend the Constitution
Allow more state bosses, state senators and state representatives to more easily amend the Constitution?
Where’s the text of the proposed amendments and repeals? Why aren’t we seeing that text with every push for an article five convention? What are they hiding?
We’re not confused. Let’s define an Article V convention.
Two-thirds (2/3) of the assemblies of the states (state representatives and senators) could force Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution. If three-fourths (3/4) of the states ratified the resulting amendments, the amendments would pass.
State and local interests with their ties to federal interests could finish taking over the government of our nation. They oppose private interests (your human and constitutional rights). We all know that.
An Article V convention would not limit the kinds of amendments to be introduced. The Constitution could be altered or abolished. That is not a confusion. We don’t trust politicians or their most influential constituents to limit their influence or incomes.
The state and local bipartisan, socialist interests accuse all who disagree with them of being Birchers. I’m not a Bircher. I’m a Noachide. I don’t respect those who libel. Contemporary political speech is full of corruption and threats. I’m nonpolitical. I disagree with contemporary politics.
Fellow Americans, every time you see such plots and schemes perpetrated by your local government-linked bosses, resolve to stop shoveling revenues and influence to those who are ruining our nation from your own community levels.
* Study and practice becoming more frugal. Don’t buy anything that you don’t really need. Why give more money and influence to the crooks?
* Study and practice becoming more self-sufficient. Why give more money and influence to the crooks?
* Study and practice manufacturing something very useful as a hobby for now. The time will come, when others will need products from you. Our country is headed for default and repudiation of debt. Eventually, debt can no longer be obtained. The flow of debt cannot be infinite and without limits. Then, when taxes are lower, regulations gone and offices closed, provide those necessities. Why give more money and influence to the crooks?
* Find out what’s going on in your communities. Vote against all new taxes and regulations. Vote against those who regulate against your private property rights. Only a very small portion of voters in my county are voting in local primaries, and an even smaller portion continues to control local politics to rob the majority of their rights with a small margin of votes.
The media runs this country into the ground for their cronies (political and otherwise), when they should be exposing corruption, waste, fraud and abuse. We’ve allowed our government and elected officials to be hijacked by crooked pols and predators that use other peoples money to advance and feed into their power. Much of what you read in the media is intended to advance the philosophy.
Agreed! We need to start a large number of new, small, free newspapers again. At some point in the economic decline, there will be enough support for a few willing to write the truth in each locale. I’ll add the suggestion for a printing press to some of those developing open source equipment designs.
Please forgive my imprecise formulations.
Surely you know that I have been advocating for an Article V Convention for months now, and that I don’t need reminding of the abuses and trauma to Consitutional government wrought by the Progressives over these many years.
Nevertheless, I am of the opinion, shared by many if not most, that the archivist will not advise the Congress that there has been a request by 34 States for an Article V Convention unless and until 34 States have requested one on the same subject.
Moreover, I do not think that there is any mechanism for you or anyone else to compel the archivist to aggregate the disparate and unrelated requests from the various States that have accumulated over the years. So, while I appreciate your point of view from an academic perspective, I think it has no practical relevance. It remains incumbent on State Legislatures to act in OUR time, on THIS subject, Federal encroachment and over-reach, and we ought not relax our efforts to encourage such action in every State.
Family poop is more like it.
Questions and answers:
1. Readers, are your state senators and representatives really more conservative than voters in general when it comes to regulating and spending?
Wrong Question. The question ought to be whether or not the state legislators are more or less conservative regarding deficit spending, debt and regulation that the Washington Beltway crowd. Answer YES, they are.
2. Allow more state bosses, state senators and state representatives to more easily amend the Constitution?
Yes, but the process is still the same, and there isn’t anything “easy” about it.
3. Where’s the text of the proposed amendments and repeals?
Surely this is an insincere question. You would know very well that the texts of the proposed Amendments would be developed by the delegates to the Article V Convention. In other words, they don’t exist, that’s why you can’t see them. On the other hand, there are numerous suggested drafts, including the ones suggested by Mark Levin in “The Liberty Amendments”. Feel free to buy a copy at your convenience.
4. Why aren’t we seeing that text with every push for an article five convention?
See 3 above. Repetitive.
5. What are they hiding?
“They,” whoever “they” are, aren’t hiding anything, and frankly it’s somewhat moronic to suggest “they” are. I wonder what YOU are hiding, such as your hidden agenda, or who you actually report to. I make this comment after noting that your contribution to this forum is obviously insincere and contrived. Given that, your posts seem most likely agenda driven, probably by the statists who are loathe to see their power undermined.
Nicely said John.
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.