Posted on 08/15/2013 9:48:33 AM PDT by Kaslin
As I read what you post is that Congress, both Senate and House I assume, has a primary role as to proceeding in the ‘Amendments Convention Method’ either way given. This is my concern, that at this time in the political scene a person like Reed today or somebody like him in the future will just stonewall any action like they do/are doing today. As such it’s dead on arrival for practical purposes.
The 3 were illustrative. Since you didn’t catch that, here is a more complete list: IL, CA, MD, HI, MA, CT, RI, VT, OR, WA, NY, NJ, DE, and ME.
There are 14 which equals 28% of the states, which is more than enough to scuttle Mr. Levin’s idea. If Mr. Levin comes up with something that does not require the agreement of those states, then I’m all ears.
The first is from the American Legislative Exchange Council. It can be downloaded from their website in PDF format.
Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers
The second is a 1973 report from the ABA attempting to identify gray areas in the amendatory process to include an Amendments Convention.
Report of the ABA Special Constitutional Convention Study Committee
These are two fine reference works from different sources that, taken together, fill in most of the blanks.
We can learn one thing from the communists, and it is: attack on all fronts at all times.
This is a good front to open.
"For all practical purposes" is not a constitutional term. The only way to repeal any constitutional statute is to amend the Constitution with an express repeal of that statute.
I recall justice Scalia at a chitchat with a congressional committee within the last year. He rattled off a bunch of swell sounding rights from the constitution of the Soviet Union. The problem was that the government, people, everyone ignored them and they were never in force.
The point of Mark's book is to reestablish what we have lost, to restore the American Republic.
5.56mm
Going back to my previous post in this thread, Levin overlooks the idea that parents are not making sure that their children are being taught the Constitution, particularly the Founding States' division of federal and state powers evidenced by the Constitution's Section 8 of Article I, Article V and the 10th Amendment.
We have a generation of low-information voters who are satisfied with letting others tell them what the Constitution says, as opposed to deciding for themselves what it says.
Now a great deal of the elected and appointed officials are immoral and areligious or anti-religious.
well I am impressed with your knowledge! Or do you have a crystal ball ? Have you been to Atlantic City lately ? Point is you don’t KNOW anything. That’s why the ‘game’ is played.
Well I’m impressed with your rudeness and obstinacy. Do you work for Gov. Christie?
In answer to your questions, if I had a crystal ball I would have already used it to pick the numbers for last weeks lotto draw. Given that none of us are truly psychic, we have to look at things based on notional probabilities.
So here is the truth you don’t want to hear: Mr. Levin’s plan to add amendments to the Constitution is useless. Perhaps even worse than useless. It has little chance of success as it relies upon our adversaries essentially rolling over and agreeing to it. There is little if any chance of that happening. If you want to waste your time with it, you don’t need my permission or blessing to do so. Knock yourself out.
I don’t work for Christie. But I will vote for him for Gov. I would rather be Obstinate and rude than a know-it-all defeatist that has thrown in the towel. Since you don’t have a crystal ball you don’t know the ‘truth’ or what I want to hear. Mark is fighting for our country..........and that I admire.
“The 10th Amendment has, for all practical purposes been excised from the constitution.” — Jacquerie
Sad but true. While Amendment 10 is also correct, pragmatic anti-constitutionalism side is EXACTLY what drives DC these days. And Kagan, our new Supreme Sandwich court member, had ended Constitutional studies in Harvard when she was a dean.
Ever since Teddy Roosevelt bypassed the Constitution to found national parks, we have had a MALIGNANT TUMOR that has eaten away respect for the Constitution. Sure, national parks could have been formed through an amendment, but Teddy was too impatient for that. Then Clinton got away with his corrupt Escalante land grab with that same kind of power [to the profit of a foreign power by the way].
A great vanity would be to go line by line through the constitution and highlight those clauses which have been excised, corrupted, or ignored. Hmm, on second thought maybe not such a great idea; little would be left un-highlighted.
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.