Replies

By custom, when states apply for a convention, they state subject matter in their applications. Congress, with the assistance of the Archivist of the United States, tabulates the applications by state (row) and subject (column). When a column reaches two thirds of the states, which is now 34, Congress issues a convention "call." This call names the time, place and subject matter. When the states assemble in convention, they are restricted to the subject matter named in their applications and reflected in the call.

Could there be a "runaway convention?" Not if the state delegations honor the language of their state applications.

Is there a "safety valve" in the process? Yes: the fact that 38 states must ratify. Congress determines whether the states will ratify by state legislatures or state ratifying conventions. If just 13 states vote not to ratify, a proposed amendment is dead.

The chief bugaboo is that some combination of liberal states might either stop conservative amendment proposals or pass one of their liberal proposals. The repeal of the 2nd Amendment is the focal point of this fear.

So far, there is not even one single application from a state requesting a convention to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If a convention were called to address Mark Levin's liberty amendments -- 4 have applied so far -- and a delegate from a liberal state were to introduce an amendment proposal to repeal the 2nd Amendment, the convention's presiding officer would gavel it down as irrelevant and a violation of the convention's purpose. If the delegate appealed to the floor, the assembled delegates would vote not to consider it for the same reason.

The best that the Left could do is block conservative proposals if they have enough presence. Right now, enough states are in control of people jealous of their state's rights to prevent this. After all, the purpose of a convention dedicated to liberty amendments is to create amendment proposals that preserve federalism (states' rights) that Congress, jealous of its powers and national powers, would never pass. I don't see the states writing amendment proposals to strengthen the powers of the central government.

I've seen FReepers suggest that Obama would send the army into the convention chamber with bayonets fixed and force them to write amendments stripping the states of their remaining powers. I've seen FReepers suggest that Obama would kidnap the delegates' families and hold them hostage. I've seen FReepers suggest that the central government would impose economic sanctions on the states to bend them to the central government's will. This is all absurd.

A Convention of the States will hold to its stated purpose. If the votes are there, amendment proposals will be generated and sent to Congress. Congress will send them to the states for ratification with instructions that such ratification is to be accomplished by state legislatures or state ratifying conventions. The form of ratification will be observed, and if three fourths of the states agree to ratify a specific proposed amendment, it will become part of the Constitution. (Note: A Convention of the States cannot say, as suggested in a work of fiction, "Hey, we're all here, so let's ratify everything!" It doesn't work that way.)

Once a successful convention convenes, does its work and then adjourns, both Congress and the political parties will be on notice that the people have found a way around them.

The chances of a Leftist takeover are about zero. They just don't have the numbers and the clout within the states.