[cba123]

NOT a good idea.

Not at all.

Liberals would go hog wild, with something like this.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Not at all. First of all, the state legislatures get to decide who goes to the convention and the majority of states are controlled by Republicans. Second, each state gets only one vote per state on which amendments are to be presented to the states so California and New York can’t bully in bullshit “rights”. Third, 3/4 of the states have to ratify each amendment.

[MeganC]

“NOT a good idea.”

It’s a Convention to propose new Amendments to the Constitution. It is not a Constitutional Convention.

All they’re going to do is propose new Amendments and then 38 states have to ratify them before they become law.

It’s about the states taking back control of Fedzilla. Nothing dangerous about it at all unless you’re a lover of unlimited Federal power.

[smokingfrog]

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments , which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states . . .

In other words, two-thirds (34) of the states pass an application for a convention to propose amendments, then the states choose their delegates, and whatever amendments are passed at that convention by the states still need to be ratified by the same process as any congressional amendment. Over the years, the states have enacted over 400 applications for a convention, but none has ever been called, because two-thirds of the states have never agreed on the subject matter for such a convention.

[Foundahardheadedwoman]

‘Liberals would go hog wild, with something like this.’

I toldally agree with you. You can say bye to the 2nd amendment. The dems will end up rigging the votes and the repubs will stand and watch them. Remember anything can be changed.

[FreeReign]

Liberals would go hog wild, with something like this.

Haven't you noticed that the liberals are going wild at the federal level?

Less centralized government power works best, to the state and to the people.

[Publius]

This is the usual boilerplate that I append to these threads for those who don't understand the Article V 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