Posted on 11/20/2014 1:07:04 PM PST by Nateman
Andrew Biggs. He is the Senate Majority leader here in Arizona. He was just unanimously voted back into his seat. He is also the fellow who REFUSES to let Article V go up for debate. I've written to him. His secretary gave me this link to a panel discussion on Article V. In this video, near the end , a Pro Article V advocate asks all those assembled: How many here support Andrew Biggs refusing to bring Article V debate to the floor? Nobody raised their hands. I mentioned that in a follow up letter comparing MR BIG to Harry Reid and that he needs to be replaced . Here is the response I got:
You’re a little late on replacing him. Leadership elections take place the day after the general election. President Biggs was re-elected unanimously since there was no opposition. He’ll hold the office for 2 years. I spoke to some of Sen. Biggs’ supporters at the event and I asked them why they didn’t raise their hands. It was a matter of them not paying attention. They didn’t catch exactly what was said. Were I not a state employee, I would have raked Mr. Dranias over the coals for that comment and I told him so afterwards. I almost spoke up, but restrained myself. Of course, personally, I have a response to your comparison of Sen. Biggs to Sen. Reid, but my position as a state employee prevents me from stating it. I’m not the Senator’s spokesman, I’m his secretary.
This is why I bring up the voter Initiative. Can We the People of Arizona by-pass the State Legislature and put the Convention call up for a direct vote?
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
That is where I need someone who knows the law. If the people of Arizona passed an Initiative that said "This bill has the same effect as if the legislature voted for it", would it have the same effect?
There's the answer.
I think not, because the Constitution explicitly says ‘legislatures’......................
Not the same.
About the best you could do with an initiative is word it so that the passing of the initiative would force the legislature of your state to vote up or down on a convention application.....................
I can’t believe I am seeing that. They probably heard it and all need to be recalled for saying otherwise.
Regarding voter initiatives and Article V, any port in a storm.
Application is sent to the National Archives and then communicated to Congress. I don’t believe the National Archives would pass on a state referendum calling for an Article V. It has no standing.
Certainly though, a clear majority of Arizonans voting in a referendum for their state lawmakers to make application for Article V should have strong influence on what those lawmakers choose to do.
So, basically the 17th was the State's consent to no longer have any representation in the US Senate. Good grief. What they hell were they thinking way back then.
I’ll agree that initiatives do not do EXACTLY what is called for but if the people vote for it, it most definitely reflects the will of the people. That is definitely in keeping with the spirit of the law. Not to mention offices that use to be picked by representatives already go to direct vote. That is certainly a precedent is it not? Article V was written PRECISELY to by-pass the tyranny of a out of control Federal Government. Can’t one say that the spirit of Article V would allow the people a way to bypass tyranny in their own state?
AZ district 12 is Gilbert and Queen Creek.
PROGRESSIVES................
In some states that is essentially the only thing that the Initiative does. I believe that would work out well. If the people voted 60/40 what kind of office holder would stand up to that ? In Arizona I suspect it would be much closer because a recent proposition limiting federal power barely passed.
I live near central Phoenix. Would I have to move to Gilbert/Queen Creek to run against MR BIG?
It has to come from a state legislature, not an initiative or referendum. Something similar to this was litigated in 1920, and the Court decided on the basis of the actual words of the Constitution.
Can’t live with them....
sure could live without them
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.