In the wake of the recent by-election results of only a few days ago which strengthens even more the Republican and conservative positions in these 99 state legislative bodies, the absurdly remote possibility of a runaway convention becomes even more the product of fantasy-or purblindness.
Please note that much of the conservative resistance to a convention of the states comes from the gun lobby who would rather see the whole the Bill of Rights disappear into the maw of corrupt Washington if only they can retain their rights to go apackin'. It pains me to make this observation, but it is necessary to say that there is a minority who actually want armed strife to bring their resentments to the point of violence.
Some such as the poster of this vanity, Fhios, might be given the benefit of the doubt for having registered with us at Free Republic only very recently. But there can be no reasonable explanation for FReepers who have been exposed to the numbers which follow time after time but who time after time choose to ignore the numbers and simply regurgitate free-floating anxieties about what will never happen.
Meanwhile, what is really happening every day is that our rights are in fact disappearing in Washington, our Constitution is being amended every day by bureaucrats and judges, presidents and congressmen, treaty makers and K St. lobbyists. It is idle to believe that Donald Trump or any other charlatan, or even any new conservative president of goodwill, can stand against the vast array of forces and money propelling the country over the cliff. The Republic should turn to the Constitution to save the Constitution because we are in desperate need not of a man on horseback but of process reform which will certainly change the way Washington does business and restore liberty to the homeland because power will be taken out of the hands of the people who are presently destroying the Constitution.
Here, once again, are the numbers:
There are 99 houses in 50 state legislatures. Any leftist amendment would require only 13 of these legislative bodies from 99 to defeat ratification. In other words, three quarters of the state legislatures must ratify or 38 states. If 13 legislatures fail to ratify the amendment is defeated. Since ratification by legislatures requires both houses to consent, only 13/99 are required. That is very close to 13%.
After the last election Republicans control 69 houses of the 99 state legislative houses. Republicans control 31 of the 50 state legislatures. To stop any unwise or imprudent amendment would require only 13 of these 69 Statehouses (from different states) or about 19%, fewer than one in five.
The problem will not be to stop left-wing amendments but to pass prudent conservative amendments which restore the Constitution by invoking the Constitution.
If the Congress of the United States elects to have the ratification procedures conducted by conventions rather than legislatures, the method of selecting the delegates to those conventions would be chosen by the legislatures. If only 13 legislative bodies out of 99 object to the method chosen by the other body because it is considered to favor a leftist amendment, there is no ratification forthcoming from that state.
By either procedure the odds of a liberal amendment getting past so many conservative legislative bodies in so many states is both arithmetically and practically remote.
Finally, this is only the last line of defense, there are innumerable steps along the way which make a "runaway convention" virtually impossible and render the need for the states to fail to ratify very likely superfluous.
Kind of like the Bible being its own best interpreter.
If the Congress of the United States elects to have the ratification procedures conducted by conventions rather than legislatures...
Can the Congress decline to chose a ratification method? I read the word may and desperately wish it were the word must. My read is that they have a way to opt out of the whole process and effectively shut it down.
I hope I'm wrong.
Please show me in the Article V sentence where it details exactly how the conduct of a state-called convention is accomplished once the initial application for convention has met the magic number 34. The fact is that you nor any other COSer can. It is also convenient to rely on sentiment, thoughts about attitudes and numbers and what would happen, but no modern amendment we currently have today that I can determine was brought about by a Convention of States method.
If I am wrong about this then show me where. Otherwise calling legitimate concerns “phony issues” and “the arithmetic prevents such and such” is just optimistic talk about something that has never occurred.
What the article states is a threshold for beginning a process it does not regulate throughout - only the requirements for passing.
To ridicule apprehension at an ill-defined and untried process is disingenuous at best and worthy of tactics the AGW lobby uses against what they call “deniers”. Given the government, political system, and society we have today, you should know better.
Here is the only number you need to know: under the Articles of Confederation, ANY change had to be unanimous. So much for that. Those odds are hardly different than yours, yet you had a “runaway convention of states.”
Art in Idaho, would you please ping your excellent list of reference links to Fhios?