[Congressman Billybob]

Look in the Congressional Record for 1992 on the official acceptance of the ratification of the 27th Amendment. You will find, as I observed as I was there for that occasion, that Congress accepted the ratifications of the 27th, but it also voided all the outstanding calls for a Convention, or any other activities by states which were older than seven years.

Read, observe, learn. It's not too difficult, You can do it.

Billybob

[seeker7_dj]

Oh, that’s right, the congressional record. Where Congress can state their “disclaimer” and morph it into the force of law? Learn sumthin’ new every day…

I’ll be dog gone if I can find in the 1992 congressional record a voiding of outstanding calls. The voiding out must be written in invisible ink where the only way to read it is to hold it up to the light of a blue moon when the planets are lined up. Below is a link to Wikipedia, on the right side of the article are 3 pages indicating the certification from the Archivist. No voiding out there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-seventh_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Or perhaps you’re referring to the Concurrent Resolutions of the 27th Amendment, which BTW has NO force of law. - S.CON.RES.120 and/or H.CON.RES.320. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d102:S.Con.Res120:

Here’s a CRS Report for congress May 1995 outlining what Congress needs to address. Apparently as of its writing nothing has been done:

“Some of the legal and constitutional issues involving state applications or petitions for a constitutional convention to propose constitutional amendments include: (1) whether or not all of the petitions have to be the same; (2) what are the scope and the limitations of such a convention; (3) what is the validity of any rescission of a petition by a state legislature; (4) do the state petitions have to be contemporaneous; and (5) what is the proper procedure for the enactment and submission of such petitions by state legislatures. There have been a number of bills in recent Congresses that have addressed these issues such as, S. 214, titled the “Constitutional Convention Implementation Act,” introduced in the 102d Congress, 1st Session (1991) which did not have any legislative activity.”
http://www.cusdi.org/crs1995durbin.htm

Son of a gun, here’s the bill mentioned above, introduced by Sen Orrin Hatch that was never passed into law. Constitutional Convention Implementation Act of 1991 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:S.214.IS:

Here’s a House Congressional record Dec 2000 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2000-12-15/pdf/CREC-2000-12-15-pt2-PgH12524.pdf where on the 4th page the Speaker of the House is addressed from the floor. Start with the paragraph beginning with:

“Now, Mr. Speaker, the next time bomb which we have not bothered to listen to is the method of amending our constitution by holding a Constitutional Convention”….. “Do State petitions have to be contemporaneous?”

Say what? I thought Congressman Billybob said “when Congress recognized the ratification of the 27th Amendment (originally written as the first of 12 Amendments in the Bill of Rights by James Madison), it also regularized the process of calls for a new Convention. It established by law that in order to be contemporaneous, such calls must be made with the last seven years.”

Well if that’s true then why on several occasions after 1992 as I’ve proved, is why are the question(s) still being asked regarding contemporaneous and same subject? I thought it was settled law in 1992?