What problems do we think we can solve Constitutional Convention?
My two cents is that it matters not how many amendments we place in the Constitution while the judiciary is intent on replacing it with its own will. More words saying it means what it says don’t matter to people who don’t read it anyway. The arms lawsuit against the City of Chicago is case in point, and the 10th amendment says it all from my perspective but apparently no longer means anything.
I’m starting to wonder if maybe the Anti-Federalists had a point when they feared that the establishment of a powerful central government would hasten a devolution into tyranny. They were right that it doesn’t really matter what is written on a piece of parchment because it only has meaning as long as it is given meaning by society and the government itself. As long as we’re in the state where it is respected by almost no one even under the best of circumstances a Constitutional Convention would be futile.
I am poking around the edges that government as constituted by the Convention of 1787 is irreparably damaged; not because the Constitution is deficient, but because the nature of a powerful central government is and it needs to be taken out behind the woodshed and put out of our misery.
For those that forgot their civics lessons...The convention can ONLY propose ammendments. After that they STILL must be approved by 3/4ths of the states. The states control the destiny, not the pundits and power hungry congress criters in DC.
We fought a civil war over this very issue. The side that insisted on states' rights lost. The side that demanded absolute obedience to an all powerful central government won. Where precisely does that leave us?