I don't think any such amendments would be successful and of course haven't argued that they would be.
If we have a convention with only a fuzzy notion of states rights as the topic nothing will be accomplished. The hard work of getting agreement on the details of amendments won't happen at a big meeting with delegations from 50 states, each coming in with their own ideas of what the amendments should be.
Do you really think that deals are actually negotiated at international summit meetings? Of course not. The hard work is done in advance and the summit is ceremonial. This isn't complicated - it's basic organizational behavior and blocking & tackling.
> “If we have a convention with only a fuzzy notion of states rights as the topic nothing will be accomplished. The hard work of getting agreement on the details of amendments won’t happen at a big meeting with delegations from 50 states, each coming in with their own ideas of what the amendments should be.”
What makes you think that the Article V COS organizing committee is going to do such a thing? What makes you think that the rules committee and organizing committee are not going to continue working on draft amendments, circulating them via email, polling and whipping state legislative offices in tandem with passing simple single subject applications to Congress?
I think you are very very lacking in experience and knowledge of legislative processes.
You do realize that the purpose of making applications to Congress is for one purpose only, to inform the National Archives that Congress is noticing the threshold has been met for a States Convention?
In the meantime, the COS committees will work towards an orderly and well-defined process of proposing amendments both prior to application and after.