Skip to comments.Congress’ Present Duty to Call a Convention. (Part V)
Posted on 11/29/2014 1:54:39 AM PST by Jacquerie
Under pressure from the base, republicans in congress are scrambling to deal with Obamas latest high crime. Rest assured whatever the GOP does will be designed to minimize electoral threats to their reelection in 2016, and ignore the well-being of our republic. Perhaps they will cut funding to that which they never appropriated funds in the first place. How about a lawsuit? Impeach? Forget it. Whatever they do will not deal with the tyranny, the precedent of executive law making that will endure after 2016 for the next president to exploit.
The framers gave us legal, constitutional means to deal with tyranny. Part V continues to examine the history of a never implemented clause in the constitution, a state convention to propose structural amendments to the constitution.
42. The 1787 framers of the constitution were careful wordsmiths. Almost every clause is the result of several committee reviews and reflect an intent to set up an innovative republican government.
It is the very simplicity of Article V which prompts any reader to immediately wonder, like James Madison, How was a convention to be formed? By what rules, etc. Despite Madisons questions, the convention chose to leave the matter open to delegates of future conventions. The framers deliberate decision to leave future conventions vague cannot be construed as a grant of authority to congress or courts to control the conventions. IOW, while the particulars of state delegate duties are general and little defined, the duty of congress is specific and well defined. Congress and the courts cannot expand the ministerial duty of congress beyond that role under the pretext of filling in the details.
Should congress or the states count the requisite number of state applications? It isnt clear, but since it is the duty of congress to call the convention, it could be argued that congress is responsible to count state applications. Regardless of which institution does the counting, the counting must be done. However, if congress is permitted to determine what is and what is not an application, the potential exists for congress to abuse that authority and unconstitutionally avoid its duty to call a convention.
43. While the framers couldnt specifically foresee the 17th amendment, they knew the historic life cycle of republics. It is unfortunate they granted congress the power they did in Article V.
Whatever the application counting role of congress, congress has neither the power to limit the subject matter of a convention for proposing amendments, nor the right to limit the convention to a narrow issue. As discussed earlier, the federal convention specifically deleted reference to a single amendment on a single issue. This deliberate change is reflected in Article V and must be given substance. Congress/courts have no authority to alter or limit that power.
Nor does the plain language of Article V empower congress/courts to limit the form of state applications by topic or time limit. The whole reason for the convention method was to give the states the ability to circumvent a recalcitrant or unresponsive congress. Any construction of Article V that gives congress the ability to limit or defeat the application process is plainly incorrect. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the history of Article V is that congress has no authority to involve itself in any way in the operation of a convention for proposing amendments once it has been called.
Matters such as where the convention will meet, who shall chair it, how voting by delegates will be conducted, and what matters the convention will consider are all beyond the authority of congress.
As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 85, once congress has called a convention it has no further role until the convention has finished its work and proposed one or more amendments.
Repeal the 16th, the 17th, anchor babies, define Natural Born Citizen, reign in the Commerce Clause, dump the alphabet agencies, balanced budget, commission-based police seizures, welfare limits, voting for only those with skin in the game. God, I could go on all night!
Most needs to be relegated back to the states. The US Constitution is not the place for all the petty little BS items.
No Congress exemptions, constituents vote on pay and benefits. They are citizens, not lords.
Every law that apples to normal peasants, applies to them. Drug test the whole lot of them weekly.
Death penalty for any politician proved to be intentionally lying!
No more government Unions. There is no one on the other side of the table who has to balance a budget and make a profit.
I expect he'll read the riot act to them, how it is their duty to demand Congress do its duty to call a convention.
There are far more than thirty-four applications sitting in the files of the Archivist of the United States.
Article V NOW.
It should be obvious by now Congress is not going to fix itself. They want amnesty either because it brings in the parasite base they need, or the low wages the chamber of crony capitalism wants. Either way YOUR money flows to the predators in the Distinct of Criminals and they will only pretend to take the necessary steps to stop the looting. Even if Article V does not get enough states to happen the closer it gets the better the counter offers by Congress that will emerge.
Cool. This actually needs to be done in the broadest terms, delegating most responsibilities back to the states. The Corporation of the United States needs to be dissolved.
This will be one interesting fight, as the statists are not going to relinquish their control willingly. It is, however, time for the citizens to reassert their right as the primary unit in this republic.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”
The progs sold some snake-oil called democracy to the nation in 1913. They said the states were corrupt and stood in the way of progress.
Government by the people, right?
Well, the people overwhelmingly rejected Obamunism this month. The winning candidates all ran on repeal of Obamacare and opposition to ethnic replacement/amnesty. Elites in both parties couldn't care less and intend to rule in opposition. If that isn't tyranny, I don't know what is.
We have just about run the full cycle of republics. If wise men from Aristotle to our Framers are correct, the next stages involve standing armies (DHS) to enforce one man, arbitrary oppression.
Yes, break the glass.
And you can take that to the bank.
—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
“God, I could go on all night!”
Article V BUMP!
(whatever it takes)
Forget the GOP in Congress, the odds that they will do something effective is close to zero. The way to go is an Article 5 Convention of the States.
Ignore my prior comment, I flew off the handle. I do believe that if the correct number of States call for a Convention, the GOP Congress will count correctly and will call for the convention. They are not as actively lawless as the Democrat Racist Party.
Every generation seems to face challenges that expose the holes in our Constitution that need plugging. Ours is no different.
Because Congress clearly, perhaps understandably under the circumstances, lacks the character depth or political will to impeach this executive, and Article V convention to propose amendments to the several states, may be a necessity.
Prepare to lobby your state legislatures.
ROFL. The cryin oompah-loompah and Yertle the turd-le don’t care.
The idea I do like -- no Constitutional amendment required -- is to take a number of the "safety-net" social programs and turn the money back to the States in the form of block grants. The States in turn can mold those programs to the requirements, and capabilities, of the States which are already in place. This would apply to all of the programs: "food stamps", Section 8 housing, school lunches. Don't forget Obamacare subsidies.
Another change not requiring a Constituional amendment: turning the establishment and maintenance of military bases to the State militias and State National Guards, keeping the Pentagon as a "clearinghouse" and "adviser" to the States -- we have much of this in place already, so it's just a matter of finishing the job.
Then the tough nut: having the IRS outsource tax collection to the revenue collection departments of each State. Yes, this would cause hardship in those States that currently don't impose an income tax on its citizens, but they do have such a department for the taxes that ARE collected. That's the first step: the IRS would still be a rule-making body for Federal tax law, but enforcement would move closer to the people.
What Constitutional amendments do I favor? Limit statutes, and the creation and passage thereof, to single subjects. Others have mentioned the elimination of law exemptions for legislators and their staff -- citizens have equal responsibilities and duties. How about term limits for bureaucrats? That might do away with some of the empire-building we see in Washington.
Actually, more than 34 applications have been submitted.*
That’s why the states should demand congress call a convention. Now.
* See the chapters beginning on page 49 at the source.
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.