Convention of States Simulation Today 8:45 AM Eastern

Convention of States ^

[Jacquerie]

Three state legislators from every state in the nation have been invited to this Simulated Convention, forming a first-of-its kind network of state representatives working to call a Convention of States for the purpose of limiting the power of the federal government.

Article V empowers state legislators to be the ultimate check on the abuses of Washington, D.C. This Simulated Convention will educate and empower them with a vision as to how they can use an Article V Convention of States to restore liberty and return the power to the states and the people.

Our nation has drifted far from the principles of liberty and self-governance that led to the creation of a federal government with specific limited, enumerated powers. At the root of the problem today are a host of constitutional “interpretations” that have erased the original limitations on federal power and created an “elite,” unresponsive ruling class in Washington, D.C. A Convention of States is the only constitutional solution as big as our nation's problems.

Just as the Founders needed to discuss, debate, and deliberate together as they formed the plans for a new government in the late 1700’s, today’s statesmen must join together and hold similar discussions, debates, and deliberations while they build a network of new American heroes. It has been said that heroes are not born — they arise out of the opportunity provided by the course of history.

The moment for new heroes is now, and this Convention will provide them the opportunity to step forward. Holding a Simulated Convention of States will demonstrate to a waiting nation that We the People can use this constitutional solution just as the Framers intended. The rules for a convention have been drafted by preeminent experts, and dozens of states are actively considering a Convention of States as the solution to our nation’s problems. This simulated Convention provides the ideal forum for state officials to learn how a convention will work, not just in theory but in actual practice. The nation awaits…

Livestream Here.

[Jacquerie]

Our beloved Constitution has been rendered into a suicide pact. The time is long past to correct its accumulated defects.

[LouieFisk]

Do you know how many will be attending?

[LouieFisk]

“The time is long past to correct its accumulated defects.”
==
The defects are mostly due to the courts playing around with it.

[lavaroise]

They do not translate the law because they both are illiterate and have an agenda like all illiterate morons.

[RipSawyer]

If I knew how I would post a picture of a man flogging a dead horse.

[nathanbedford]

Jacquerie:

I applaud you for your indefatigable contributions to the Convention of States movement which is providentially proceeding toward fashioning solutions authorized by the Constitution to save the Constitution itself. Your contribution here on Free Republic has been invaluable in setting the record straight in the face of misguided, ignorant, or leftist opposition. I expect this dress rehearsal will go a long way toward allaying unreasonable and ironic fears that the constitutional remedy for our present state of politics will somehow make a bad situation worse. We have nothing to lose considering our present plight and everything to gain.

Bravo!

[wita]

“today’s statesmen must join together and hold similar discussions, debates, and deliberations while they build a network of new American heroes. It has been said that heroes are not born — they arise out of the opportunity provided by the course of history.”

...and just who are today’s statesmen? I can assure you if there were Statesmen today and there are a few, they will likely not be delegates to a convention. Neither will the state representatives selected for this exercise, who were selected because of their belief that an article V would be appropriate at this particular time.

Congress, who makes the call for a convention, and will likely have much to say regarding any effort by the States or the people to take back what rightly belongs to them through the Article V including who might be selected as delegates for such a move, and delegates make the rules under which they operate, after the convention is convened.

Time for the bottom line. In today’s world with the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Executive branches of Government absolutely “out of control”, how in the name of reality, common sense, or logic, could anyone make a case that an Article V Convention at this time in our history is the smart or intelligent thing to do.

What is more likely is an Article V event will be a convention of factions, special interests, political parties, anti-american’s new worlders, globalists, socialists, and if we are lucky a few Statesmen who could hopefully derail the agenda’s of the other factions, but without the majority needed to bring about what we the people are really seeking as a result. The restoration of limited Government, Constitutional Governance, and the Republic.

[cgbg]

“This sounds like a meeting of racist, homophobic, xenophobic, white men. I promise that under my administration such mass gatherings of hate will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”

Love, Hillary

[wita]

Since the folks so enamored of an Article V can’t seem to make the case for one, to a sufficient number of States, I think personally I would regard throwing words like misguided, ignernt, and leftist, a bit premature. More likely those of us under oath to support and defend the Constitution would like to be a bit cautious about opening the door to the misguided, ignernt, leftists with designs on “needed” changes to the Constitution.

[wita]

Thanks for the link to the live stream.

[nathanbedford]

Okay, we will play your game. If you are knowledgeable kindly tell us:

It's now almost exactly 8 AM Eastern standard Time, kindly advise us right away how many state legislatures are needed to stop a proposed amendment, and why it might be state legislatures rather than some other entity, and if some other entity what entity, that might pass on referenda?

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Bump!

[nathanbedford]

make that proposed amendments not "referenda."

[PGalt]

Thanks Jacquerie. Very, very interesting.

[teeman8r]

can’t make it. sorry. — b. franklin

[Avalon Memories]

Wita, I agree with you. This is a dangerous and naive idea. It might work if we were living in the lat 1700's or early 1800's, but the union of states that existed then went on life support with the Civil War. It died with ratification of the 16th and 17th Amendments.

Today our states don't even recognize themselves as sovereign entities. They are on the federal teat and like it that way. So yes, a 21st Century convention of states would be a mess of many factions, all of which would be pulling and tugging for their own special interests.

[Jacquerie]

Nope. I know the number has been published but I don’t recall.

[Jacquerie]

Agree. A blog post next week will discuss Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments. One of them deals with judicial tyranny.

[Jacquerie]

I believe you. Some people find pictures to be the best way to express their feelings. Keep looking.

[stremba]

The thing to remember is that the purpose of an Article V convention is to propose amendments to the Constitution. It is not some over the top revolutionary scheme; it is merely one of the two methods by which amendments may be proposed.

Any amendments proposed by the convention would be subject to the same ratification procedures as amendments proposed by Congress. Three fourths of the states would have to ratify for it to take effect. The whole purpose of the convention is to allow states to propose amendments without the approval of Congress. It is simply meant to be a method for states to limit the power of the Federal government.

I don’t know how effective a convention would be. With the divisive political climate we now have, getting 37 states to ratify any amendment would be a tall order. Personally, I would try to shoot for something that would potentially have broad popular appeal regardless of political affiliation. For instance I think an amendment to simplify the legislation passed by Congress would have a shot. Limiting laws to a single issue and outlawing riders dealing with unrelated issues seems like a small thing, but such a measure would greatly change the way Congress does business. Often Congressional leadership will tack a rider onto a bill they want passed that makes members unwilling to vote against the bill.

For example they could put renewed funding for veterans’ programs on a bill that restricts gun ownership. That puts conservative lawmakers in a bad position - do you vote for gun control or do you oppose the bill and have your next election opponent run commercials about your vote to deny funding to veterans? This type of thing goes on all the time, and it’s often the reason that otherwise good lawmakers make votes that leave you scratching your head wondrring why.