Posted on 02/22/2017 10:54:09 PM PST by Perseverando
The State Senate of Tennessee has laid the legislative groundwork for something that hasn't been done in the United States of America since the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia. With a vote of 27-3, the Tennessee Senate has voted to call a "convention of the states" in order to draft and pass an amendment to the Constitution that would require balanced budgets to be passed every year.
For those who are little fuzzy on their high school U.S. history knowledge, the Tennessean explains that the U.S. Constitution can be amended in two ways. The first would require a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers of Congress, an unlikely outcome in today's hyper-partisan political arena. The second, on the other hand, requires that two-thirds of the states (34 in total) pass a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention.
There are two ways to propose amendments to the Constitution. The first and more traditional method is through a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Then the amendment is sent to the state legislatures, where it needs ratification by three-fourths or 38 states in order to become law. Nearly all 27 amendments have followed this path.
But the Constitution also provides a second, more populist path to amending the document. If two-thirds or 34 states pass a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention, delegates from all 50 states will meet to draft an amendment. This is what the Tennessee lawmakers are calling for in their resolution.
Of course, calls for a convention to pass a balanced budget amendment started in the 1970s and have failed each time. That said, with Republicans now controlling 32 state legislatures, this latest effort initiated by Tennessee seems to have the best chance of succeeding so far.
And while there have been close calls for Constitutional Conventions before, each time Congress has acted preemptively to stave off the need for a convention. In 1911, for example, 28 states of the required 32 passed a resolution calling for direct election of Senators before Congress intervened and drafted the Seventeenth Amendment instead.
***
The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and Ratification.
Proposal:
There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.
Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.
Disposal:
Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:
The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.
Ratification:
Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
Forbidden Subjects:
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.
Explicitly forbidden:
Implicitly forbidden:
Reference works:
Frequently Asked Questions About a Convention of the States
Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers
State Initiation of Constitutional Amendments: A Guide for Lawyers and Legislative Drafters
There are many more that are working on passage of an application, many having passed one chamber already, and yet many more that have introduced an application.
The movement is much more than just 8 states.
I understand that. However, only 8 states have gotten to the point where both houses of the legislature have submitted applications to Congress using Georgia’s language.
Yes, understood. Many reading however, do not understand that an application has to be approved by both chambers of a state legislature (Nebraska the only exception as it has only one chamber which you know but others don’t).
Thos reading also may not understand that this can be done in a state legislature without any involvement of a state governor.
The movement is therefore much larger than 8 states and is unimpeded by any actions of any governor.
I know you are aware of al of the above and more, but I tend to write so that others reading will learn a wider context and reach a deeper understanding.
OK, folks. Let’s talk numbers and sense, here. I understand that this can sound scary, but since 3/4 of the states have to ratify ANYTHING that comes out of such a Convention of States, a grand total of THIRTEEN STATES CAN KILL ANYTHING THAT COMES FROM THIS PROCESS.
If we can’t count on at least 13 state legislatures to kill something stupid and/or dangerous, it’s way past time to pull the pin on the second amendment, anyway. And nobody wants that.
I say, call the amendment convention.
Thanks for taking over the thread. I’ve got too much going on to stay with FR for most of today.
bump all you gotta do is read!
They can already do all that so what worries you? The simple fact is a COS requires exactly the same votes to amend the Constitution as does the Congress, the only difference is Congress and the Courts have no say in the matter, the proposed by a COS.
My only problem is that they ignore the Constitution now so why would they care if you add some more stuff they can ignore?
They can already do that, just because they laid down for Marbury-Madison doesn't mean the have to stay dead on the issue.
The Congress has the authority to pass legislation not subject to Judicial review so one might wonder why they don't assert their authority. I have said for years they hide behind courts that implement their true agenda without taking the blame.
What restrains Congress from doing the same thing? Nothing except they would have to get the 38 States to approve it, the same votes a COS would have to have.
bump
<>The Constitutional Convention, if it is ever called, will be populated by Congress critters.<>
Uh, no.
See post #23.
It appears that very few Article V opponents bother to check out your fine online library. Never before has so much information and analysis been available at one’s fingertips, yet so many prefer to remain ignorant.
Thank You Jacquerie. Repetition is the key. It goes without saying if you see a link that should be added, please email me with said information.
You bet!
If you’re in a state that hasn’t already called for a Convention, contact your legislators.
Thanks for jumping in. I’ve been too buried to do more than post my usual boilerplate.
>
The Congress has the authority to pass legislation not subject to Judicial review so one might wonder why they don’t assert their authority. I have said for years they hide behind courts that implement their true agenda without taking the blame.
>
Oh, they shall take the blame coming and going as it were.
It is unfortunate the Citizens are mostly ignorant on the true authorities of govt. Most have no clue on the ability of Congress to do just that; IMO, the ignorance is what govt seeks.
No Q&A, news outlet or the like would ever allow the question of “What good is Congress?” for allowing the over-reach, not removing judges a/o not ‘laying down’ for the courts? IE: Hiding behind the Judiciary, as you point out.
Outstanding!!!
Haven’t time to read the entire article yet. Working on Texas to get that #10 spot now!
Pre-17th Amendment, the farm team for senators was the state legislatures. Since, its been the House of Reps. Bad. Post-17A, there’s no electoral upside for senators to give a rip about scotus decisions. In order to reestablish the 10th Amendment, and the authority of congress, the 17A must go.
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.