Posted on 11/14/2014 1:13:13 AM PST by Jacquerie
Full title: Lawful and Peaceful Revolution: Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention for Proposing Amendments.
The means to peacefully amend our form of government is unique to American constitutions, as evidenced in the early state constitutions immediately after independence and the 1777 Articles of Confederation.
In an odd twist, it was the amending Article, number XIII of the confederation that sowed the seed of its own destruction. While acknowledging that government must be amenable to change determined by its member states, it required unanimous consent of all states. In theory the Articles of Union were amendable, in practice they were not.
It was the reality of a government stuck without a regular source of revenue, and a collection of states that bickered endlessly over commerce, that prompted the states to send delegates to Philadelphia.
Part I examined the evolution of Article V at the federal convention of 1787. Its several versions featured amendment responsibility entirely within the states, entirely within congress, single amendments, multiple amendments . . . and finally the smoothed Article V adopted unanimously on the last day of debate.
This post, Part II begins at page 26 of the source, and paraphrases its essential points.
26. Article V represents a compromise between the nationalists and states’ rights delegates at the federal convention. Both had to settle for the power of the other side to propose amendments, yet both got what they wanted. Congress could propose amendments it thought were needed, and the states could go around congress and propose amendments at a convention.
Make no mistake, the terms of Article V secure the power of a sovereign people, via their state legislatures, to go around a recalcitrant congress and exercise their God given right to frame their government. No interpretation, no construction of Article V can defeat that purpose by granting congress any authority to limit or prevent the calling or operation of such a convention.
27. Single vs. Multiple Amendments.
The Articles of Confederation allowed one amendment at a time to be sent to the states. As covered in Part I, the Virginia Plan submitted at the opening of the federal convention did not address singular v. multiple amendments.
Keeping with the form of the Articles of Confederation, Alexander Hamilton’s motion later on allowed multiple amendments to be sent from the states to congress. Ratification consisted of amendments passing the House and Senate.
On August 6th 1787, the convention accepted an amendment article that did not allow for multiple amendments. It was single amendments or nothing. James Madison and Roger Sherman’s motion in early September replaced the singular for plural amendments. The issue of single v. multiple amendments never surfaced again.
28. Article V speaks for itself. Congress shall call a “Convention for proposing amendments,” and not a convention for proposing an amendment. It is clear an Article V state convention has power to consider multiple issues and submit various amendments to the states, just as congress had done in the past. Topics to be considered are not the concern of congress.
In addition, Article V does not authorize the states to apply for an amendment, rather it empowers the states to apply for a convention for proposing amendments. Once two thirds of the states apply, congress must call a convention.
Article V ping!
BTTT!
They will finally get what they want.. If a con con is called they will take our guns and our religious pseudo- freedoms. These people will not honestly and laboriously follow the Constitution now, and they will not do so with the call. Our last grip on society will be lost through fraud and fraudulent legal processes.
Exactly. Without a lot of spiritual turning back, the US will simply vote itself to be constitutionally a European socialist state.
Bttt
2. There are 350 million plus guns in the US. Do you intend to give up yours? Neither will the rest of us.
3. <>These people will not honestly and laboriously follow the Constitution now, and they will not do so with the call.<>
That is a common concern and easily addressed.
The only worthwhile amendments are structural, like those proposed by Mark Levin, which cannot be ignored any easier than even year elections.
4. To restore religious freedom, restore the structural division of power design of our framers. Start with a senate of the states and go from there.
Oh, one more thing. Rather than erupt in emotion, try educating yourselves. Knowledge awaits you at the link.
Our Constitution does not need amending so much as it needs following. The Communists/ Fascists/ National Scoialists need removing by what ever means.
Congress is proved to be institutionally incapable of defending its (our) turf. These assaults are done despite the parchment barriers of the constitution.
The answer is to restore the foundation of our freedom, which is the separation of power. Keep Scotus and El Presidente in their boxes. That can only be accomplished via return to a senate of the states, through an Article V convention of the states to propose amendments.
But don't take my word, check out James Madison in Federalist #49.
Sixty-six out of ninety-nine state legislative houses are in GOP hands. This window of opportunity will not last long.
There is one flaw in your assertions that ‘they’ will take our guns, take our “religious pseudo-freedoms” and vote themselves a “European socialist state”.
That flaw is why don’t ‘they’ themselves call a convention? What’s stopping them?
Thanks for the ping.
Let’s roll!
If only Freepers would take a little time away from posting, and call, write, email, facebook their state reps, and demand they do their duty!
They didn't bother because a hundred years after the 16th and 17th amendments, the Left is very close to consummating their plan to establish tyranny without any further formal change to the Constitution.
Too many Freepers think we'll lose freedoms we've already lost.
Article V Now!!!
Most FReepers are aware of these links, but I repost anyway for review and for people new to Article V. It is our responsibility to make Article V the most understood aspect of the US Constitution.
The longer we wait, the bigger the risk of secession or outright civil war.
Convention of States - Alabama Way to go Alabama! A good introduction.
'Convention of states' to rein in government Another great summary explanation.
The Case for an Article V. Convention. Fantastic explanation of Article V convention to the Mass State Legislature.
I would recommend watching the above three videos first and then:
Convention of States Lots of information here.
Article V Project to Restore Liberty Another good source.
Convention of States model Resolution
A Summary of Mark Levin’s Proposed Amendments by Jacquerie
Chapter 1 of Mark Levin’s Book, The Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin, Constitution Article V, and the Liberty Amendments
Rep. Bill Taylor introduces a Convention of States
Mark Levin Article V, Liberty Amendments youtube video hub
Three hour video of C-Span interview with Mark Levin
Gaining Steam? Nearly 100 Lawmakers Descend on Mount Vernon to Talk Convention of States The beginning.
Convention to Propose Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Other Way to Amend the Constitution: The Article V Constitutional Convention Amendment Process
Friends of the Article V Convention Friends of Article V Convention Links
Ulysses at the Mast: Democracy, Federalism, and the Sirens' Song of the Seventeenth Amendment by Jay Bybee. Repeal the 17th!
Article V Convention: Path of Least Resistance by Robert Berry
Article V Handbook - for State Legislators An important resource.
State Legislators Article V Caucus State Legislators, Join up at this site!
Send this list of links to your State Representatives and Senators here: Contact your State Legislators.
Sample Letter to state Representatives regarding the Convention of States Project and also, Talking Points. Both from Here.
Excellent Article V Letter to a State Assemblyman by Jacquerie
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke. Let’s all work together to get this going.
Exactly correct, as I've stated to the naysayers before. If the left had the votes to take our guns through amending the constitution they would have done it a long time ago. They would use article V for their agenda. The reason they don't is obvious to any thinking person. The lefts agenda simply doesn't have support of the people.
At this point those posting stuff like "they will take or guns", "religious freedoms" etc. must be written off as trolls or willingly ignorant. Two years ago this mindset could have been understandable but today there is no excuse.
Thanks for the ping. Again, I commend you for your patience with the inevitable comments from the poorly informed. I for one would like to see a link to http://www.conventionofstates.com/ and
with every Article V thread on FR.
gopherit
Proposal:
There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.
Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.
Disposal:
Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:
The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.
Ratification:
Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
Forbidden Subjects:
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.
Explicitly forbidden:
Implicitly forbidden:
I have two reference works for those interested.
The first is from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative pro-business group. This document has been sent to every state legislator in the country.
Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers
The second is a 1973 report from the American Bar Association attempting to identify gray areas in the amendatory process to include an Amendments Convention. It represents the view of the ruling class of 40 years ago. While I dislike some of their conclusions, they have laid out the precedents that may justify those conclusions. What I respect is the comprehensive job they did in locating all the gray areas. They went so far as to identify a gray area that didn't pop up until the Equal Rights Amendment crashed and burned a decade later. Even if you find yourself in disagreement with their vision, it's worth reading to see the view of the ruling class toward the process.
Report of the ABA Special Constitutional Convention Study Committee
They don’t need to. They have succeeded in one party, one branch of government rule.
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.