[Publius]

One thing I've noticed is the fear and hostility the suggestion of a convention creates at this site. With the able assistance of Congressman Billybob, who is a constitutional lawyer based in North Carolina, I wrote the essay to which I linked in Post #28, which lays out the whole thing according to the 1992 law standardizing the amendatory process.

I believe the states are so angry that two-thirds could in fact demand a Conventon for Proposing Amendments. But as Judge Napolitano pointed out, the language has to be carefully written because that language will determine the legal scope of the agency agreement between the states and the convention. Further, Congress will do anything it can to deep-six a convention if the wording is not absolutely identical. We need some state legislators to coordinate between the states to make sure the authorizing language in the petitions is identical and legally airtight, else Congress will make mischief.

[Hostage]

I will read your post #28 and thank you for the effort.

Details of the language are indeed important and I am confident we will have the finest jurists in the country inspecting every sense of it.

What really needs to be done now is to repeatedly broadcast what we are discussing here and the hidden power that conservatives have!