Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part II)

Hamline Law Review ^ | Fall 1990 | Bruce M. Van Sickle & Lynn M. Boughey

[Jacquerie]

Article V is the American remedy to America’s problems. It should be utilized as intended, to reform when needed, the structure of a government gone despotic. Upon thirty-four state applications, congress is required to call a state convention to propose amendments. It is as simple as that.

Part I

[Jacquerie]

Article V ping!

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

BTTT!

[momincombatboots]

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.

[InMemoriam]

Exactly. Without a lot of spiritual turning back, the US will simply vote itself to be constitutionally a European socialist state.

[uncitizen]

Bttt

[Jacquerie]

1. There is no such thing as a con-con.

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.

[Jacquerie]

Oh, one more thing. Rather than erupt in emotion, try educating yourselves. Knowledge awaits you at the link.

[Lion Den Dan]

Our Constitution does not need amending so much as it needs following. The Communists/ Fascists/ National Scoialists need removing by what ever means.

[Jacquerie]

Obama makes laws. Scotus makes laws. Separation of power is breached.

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.

[Hostage]

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?

[Repeal The 17th]

Thanks for the ping.
Let’s roll!

[Jacquerie]

We have a two year window. After that, rule-by-decree will be established precedent.

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!

[DJ MacWoW]

Donate And Keep The Lights On

[Jacquerie]

The Pelosi/Reid congress could have proposed any statist amendment they wished. They didn't. Why?

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!!!

[Art in Idaho]

Good article. Thanks for posting.

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

Citizens for Self Governance: Convention of States Project – a hub of 15 youtube videos on the Convention of States

Mark Levin Article V, Liberty Amendments youtube video hub

Three hour video of C-Span interview with Mark Levin

Amendments Convention Links

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.

[precisionshootist]

"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?"

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.

[GopherIt]

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

[Publius]

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and Ratification.

Proposal:

There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.

• The Congressional Method requires the House and Senate to pass an amendment by a two-thirds majority.
• The Amendments Convention Method requires the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to petition Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. The states may request a single-subject convention or a general convention open to all subjects. Once the two-thirds threshold is reached, Congress is required to set a time and place for the convention.

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:

• State Legislature Method, or the
• State Ratifying Convention Method.

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:

• No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning slavery or capitation taxes until 1808. We’re past that deadline.
• No amendment may be added to the Constitution to change the principle of equal representation in the Senate unless every state deprived of that right approves. If California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit violation of this principle, every state would have to ratify the amendment, not just three-fourths.

Implicitly forbidden:

• The Constitution of 1787 may not be abrogated and replaced with a new document. Article V only authorizes “a convention for proposing amendments to this Constitution”; therefore, the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place forever. Congress and an Amendments Convention have exactly the same Proposal power; therefore, neither Congress nor an Amendments Convention can start over. Both bodies can only propose amendments. To permit the drafting of a new constitution, this provision in Article V would first have to be repealed; it would be a two-step process.

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

[momincombatboots]

They don’t need to. They have succeeded in one party, one branch of government rule.