North Dakota Becomes 10th State To Pass Convention of States!

https://www.facebook.com/conventionofstates/ ^

[cotton1706]

BREAKING NEWS!

Today North Dakota became the tenth state to successfully adopt our Article V legislation! This is a historic victory for the grassroots warriors of COS North Dakota, our legislative champions, and the American people.

North Dakota joins nine other states calling for an Article V Convention of States for the purpose of proposing constitutional reforms that limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints, and set term limits for federal officials, including Congress and the judiciary!

Americans see a flailing federal government that is out of ideas. We are ready to break the shackles of big government and return decision-making where it was belongs.

[redfreedom]

Betcha this dies not set well with ND Sen Hoeven (R) who is a US Chamber Of Commerce puppet and Free Labor Express RINO.

[redfreedom]

“The left wants it more.”

That’s my biggest fear.

Imagine, just as one example, for the left to successfully get the 2nd Amendment redone to redefine it as being for cops, military and bolt action rifle hunting only, with full registration of any private gun.

Now there would have to be massive fraud, on a scale greater than it took to almost get Hitlery in, but they are cornered rats and they will come out fighting litterally for their lives.

[CommieCutter]

I used to be for this now I’m not.

[Hostage]

They, Congress and the courts, cannot ignore the following:

************************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII (’State Suffrage’)

To restore effective suffrage of State Legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:

************************************************
Section 1.
A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.

Section 2.
Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.

Section 3:
The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

************************************************

************************************************
AMENDMENT XXIX (‘Thirty-State Quash Authority’)

To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the States, the following amendment is proposed:

************************************************
Section 1.
Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, federal court decisions and executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void in any state, territory, or possession of the United States.

Section 2.
State legislatures in agreement with results derived from Section 1 of this amendment shall sign a state quash authority directive delineating the specific federal statutes, federal court decisions or federal executive directives affected, said directive addressed and delivered to the Congress of the United States becoming immediately effective as of the date of delivery.
************************************************

These illustrations are written in a manner that THE STATES ARE GIVEN RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY. Amendments should be written so that it is clear that the federal government has no mandate regarding the interpretation or selective enforcement or non-enforcement of these types of amendments.

For example, the flawed 10th Amendment leaves all powers not enumerated in the US Constitution to the States or to the People. However, there is no mechanism left to the states to check the federal government with the 10th Amendment save for the appointment of US Senators by state legislatures which was abolished under the 17th Amendment. As it is, the 10th Amendment jurisdiction is left to the federal judiciary without any voice or role for the States. The result of these compounded errors has yielded a highly centralized federal government whereby power is attained by an enormous federal government and funded by the Federal Reserve.

An illustration addressing the 16th Amendment:

************************************************
AMENDMENT XXX (‘Sunset and Repeal of the 16th Amendment’)

To facilitate Age-Of-Awareness Connectivity In Funding The Federal Government Of The United States:

************************************************
Section 1.
All forms of federal taxation in the United States, and unto the territories of its jurisdiction, that are derived under the authority of the sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be abolished and repealed by April 16, 2022.

Section 2.
As of April 16, 2022, the sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 3:
Enforcement of federal tax liabilities shall cease as of January 1, 2025 with exceptions granted to active judicial proceedings initiated before January 1, 2025.
************************************************

By ‘Age Of Awareness’ means technologies of connectivity. These technologies did not exist in the 19th century nor at the time of the 1913 installation of the 16th Amendment. Had such suitable technology existed, the 16th Amendment would never have been installed. The 16th Amendment is in fact, a poorly designed instrument proffered by persons of poor judgment, lacking requisite information or awareness of purposes behind the original federal design. It is completely unsuitable in our Age of Awareness.

The 16th, 17th, and 18th Amendments are all from the year 1913 and were all done in the era of Woodrow Wilson who either advocated for such amendments or failed to thwart their passage. The 18th was repealed but the 16th and 17th remained and evolved slowly.

The 16th was particularly insidious as its original code was only 14 pages long and imposed a ‘Flat Tax’ rate of 7% on the wealthiest 2% of Americans and a rate of only 1% on the rest of Americans.

The ‘1%’ rate is still used to this day in attempts to impose a state income tax in states where no state income tax exists. The ‘1%’ rate appears innocent, non-threatening, innocuous. It is a backdoor quiet entry to grab power and control. Once inside the system, it grows and creeps until it resembles what exists today. Therefore note, any INCOME TAX is a cancer because it is impossible to contain over time. It gives legislators a tool by which they can grab and solidify their own power (legislative angiogenesis).

There is a vastly superior alternative to the income tax. A consumption tax with impact floor is embodied in H.R. 25. Its superiority to any income tax scheme cannot be overstated.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3496700/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3423235/posts?page=949#949
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3461988/posts?page=18#18

[Hostage]

The illustrated Amendment XXIX in #24 addresses all of the concerns you raise. It is simple and its products can be executed completely outside the purview of any federal entity.

[Hostage]

Nothing is ‘cracked open’. It is true that many things will be proposed but it takes 34 states to agree to propose an amendment, and it takes even more, 38 states to ratify a proposed amendment.

[Hostage]

The left is barely breathing in most of the states. So you are suggesting that leftists are going to ride into state capitols and bust those towns up. Guess who is delusional.

[wita]

Rather than repeal which will be next to impossible, I suggest nullification, allowing the States Senators to serve out their terms, followed by the State Legislature choosing their Senators. Takes guts, but it can be done, especially if you can get five or ten states working together.

Avoiding the significant dangers of opening the Constitution to progressive meddling through an Article V event.

[wita]

You understand the issue. Sort of like when the children of Israel were having difficulty with the ten commandments, God came out with number eleven to get them back on track.

[wita]

Let me see if I understand. Those requirments you have listed, are found in the same Constitution we are ignoring right now. The one some think only needs one or two more amendments to make all things right. Is that about right?

[Wolfie]

Ha. I guess we need a “We Really Mean It This Time” Amendment.

[wita]

Sums it up nicely.

[Hostage]

> “Those requirments you have listed, are found in the same Constitution we are ignoring right now.”

The Constitution is overwhelmingly followed by the courts. The few odd times it is not, the national media picks up the story and blasts it out in a sensational manner giving the illusion that the Constitution is no longer the law of the land when it very much in fact is.

Summary: your remark shows your mind is controlled and programmed by persons and organizations of the press.

The illustrations of #24 are written in such a way that it doesn’t matter if any federal entity ignores them or not. Ignoring those illustrated amendments has no effect.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I agree that sunset of the Sixteenth Amendment is desirable, and would tend to put downward pressure on the federal Leviathan. Getting it done seems a long shot, but . . .

Repeal of the Seventeenth Amendment seems especially unlikely to pass. If we can’t get that, I suggest two possible alternatives. One would be to make Senators running mates of governors - so the heaping of responsibility onto the states would at least have an effect on the political viability of the governor who is the running mate of the Senator.

The other would be to make the election for senator be from a ballot established by the legislature - there would only be two candidates for senator, no third party candidates. And, each legislator would only vote for one candidate. Therefore, the majority party would name a candidate and the minority party would name a candidate. The people of the state would still elect, but the winning senator would still be beholden to the Legislature for future renomination.

[Publius]

Article V ping.

And now there are 10: AL, AK, AZ, FL, GA, IN, LA, ND, OK, TN.

10 down, 24 to go.

[Publius]

My usual boilerplate for these threads that explains the process.

***

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.

• The Congressional Method requires the House and Senate to pass an amendment by a two thirds majority.
• The Amendments Convention Method requires the legislatures of two thirds of the states to apply to Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. Once the two thirds threshold is reached, Congress is required to set a time and place for the convention.

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:

• State Legislature Method, or the
• State Ratifying Convention Method.

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 fourths 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:

• No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning slavery or capitation taxes until 1808. We’re well past that deadline.
• No amendment may be added to the Constitution to change the principle of equal representation in the Senate unless every state deprived of that right approves. If California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit violation of this principle, every state would have to ratify the amendment, not just three fourths.

Implicitly forbidden:

• The Constitution of 1787 may not be abrogated and replaced with a new document. Article V only authorizes “a convention for proposing amendments to this Constitution;” therefore, the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place forever. Congress and an Amendments Convention have exactly the same Proposal power; therefore, neither Congress nor an Amendments Convention can start over. Both bodies can only propose amendments.

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

[PrairieLady2]

Nope. Won’t work. Any law is subject to twisting and re-interpreting. Once they get the lid open on that old, antiquated and passe` document, it will cease to exist.

We already have a president who is trying to restore states rights, and the politicians don’t want it! Almost half the country is deluded, can’t see the light of truth, can’t vote in a decent representative because they can’t judge character decently ...nope. Leave the document alone and get rid of the misinterpretations and spin we already have.

[Vaquero]

Your delusional if you don’t think that Soros, Blumberg et al wouldn’t dump billions in the state capitols and wreak financial and/or discord havoc.

[Jacquerie]

Outstanding!

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm