I left this post at the site too:
I assume the author is referring to the IN law limiting the delegates ability to alter the amendments prescribed by the legislature?
This legislation was an assurance to not just the opponents of an Article V session would not result in chaos, but for themselves to maintain control of the outcome.
As this is a new procedure, the state legislators are stepping timidly to insure complete control. They understand that this effort must be able to withstand attacks of all opponents in the future.
Consider that complete control will guarantee that multiple versions of an amendment are not crafted. Exiting the session with multiple version will create the exact havoc the author describes.
This may be a one time shot and I do not blame legislators for wanting to get it right from the start.
In fact, Mr. Berry’s suggestion to not place clear limits on the delegates could create more trouble than actually doing so.
I like and commend the legislators for the clear, cautious and controlled path currently being created.
Besides, if the states pass resolutions identical to the one below and commission their delegates to the limits implied by it, I think the convention will have plenty of leeway.
Section 1. The legislature of the State of ______ hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.