Posted on 11/09/2017 4:04:51 AM PST by SMGFan
Following passage of a joint State Senate resolution Tuesday, Wisconsin became the 28th state to call for a U.S. constitutional convention.
Earlier this year, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed a similar resolution.
As the resolutions have now passed both houses of the state Legislature, and as Governor Scott Walker’s approval is not needed, last night’s vote made Wisconsin’s call for a constitutional convention official.
The convention was called in support of a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution which would require the federal government to operate under a balanced budget.
(Excerpt) Read more at badgerherald.com ...
Happy for this, based on Mark Levin’s good arguments.
...I see the usual “arguments” here on this thread that are fully answered and non-issues...
Yes. As always. The US Constitution was signed September 17th, 1787. We still abide by it’s terms of how to create Amendments. And how they can’t be created.
An Article V Convention of States is the only way to reestablished our Republic since the DC swamp will not surrender their power.
Repeal the 17th Amendment, Term Limits for Congress and the Courts, Balanced Budget, and Congressional approval on Federal regulations with greater than $100 million economic impact.
We already have Executive and Judicial “conventions” every time the swamp issues unconstitutional executive actions or sweeping SCOTUS rulings. Three Fourths of the State legislatures must adopt any Amendment just as if it came from Congress.
It’s the only way.
Actually our present con was of 1789 origin.
Our first con was known as the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union...that saw us through the “Revolution” defeating the most mighty military empire on earth!
Ok. Then offer a better plan. What would you suggest?
If the Constitutional Convention had not arrived at the Constitution, (which was then ratified by the states), we would not be here.
Very likely the states would have broken up and been conquered as separate entities. It was a very close thing.
Ok. Then offer a better plan. What would you suggest?
I fully agree. Between the lobbying and influence of liberals, academia, far-left media, RINOs - we'd end up with a Constitution like that of the People's Republic of China - or worst.
Elect officials who will uphold and enforce the Constitution we have.
Rats on the state level are salivating looking to tap into 401k and other retirement programs for more dollars for their failed programs
I voted NO. Trump was beaten by 2/3rds here in NYS. I don’t want those 2/3 liberals running a CON-CON.
Want to defuse the pension bomb? Pass a law on the issue.
I plan on getting out of this f*****g State one day. My governor said I am not wanted.
A Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also called an Article V Convention, or Amendments Convention, called for by two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures, is one of two processes authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Amendments may also be proposed by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.[1]
To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either—as determined by Congress—the legislatures of three-fourths (presently 38) of the states or State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states. Thirty-three amendments to the United States Constitution have been approved by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. Twenty-seven of these amendments have been ratified and are now part of the Constitution. As of 2017, the convention process has never been used for proposing constitutional amendments.
>
...The ConCon being voted on will only be allowed to consider to require the federal government to operate under a balanced budget. Nothing else. No Second Amendment revision, no change of the electoral college... absolutely nothing else.
>
IOW, enforce and follow the Constitution as it exists today (A1S8).
The *ONLY* thing a BBA (Balanced Budget Amendment) would do is codify a reason for Congress to raise taxes, “Well, it’s the LAW, and we have to raise taxes to pay for...”.
Not unless they put some teeth into Constitutional violators (and I don’t mean ‘loss of position, while keeping every other perk’.
>
The Constitution only allows specific and PRESTATED listed amendments to be considered. Absolutely Nothing else. It is not a free for all “Let’s do the whole thing.”
>
Because we all *KNOW* the States are the bastions of protecting their Citizens and Rights vs. Fedzilla *rolls eyes*
The ConCon could turn into a ConAss - a constituent assembly which abrogates the old Constitution and drafts a totally new document. Kind of Federal level mob rule by acclamation and the sky’s the limit.
Scares the bejeezus out of me. We’ll end up with constitutional “rights” to a job, housing, health care, paid vacations, free college, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.......
When today’s politicians get done you won’t recognize it. Free Speech, Christianity, guns will all be gone. I don’t care what their stated intentions are; they won’t be bound by their promises.
This will be like the O.J. trial.
Not necessary. Public Law 95-435, Section 7, adopted in 1981, states that the Federal Government can not spend more than it takes in. It is still valid, so why do our elected officials in Congress not obey that law?
Which raises a number of other questions. Is there a penalty clause for violations of the law? Can each politician who voted for violation of the law be punished? Is a violation a misdemeanor or a felony? Who would prosecute the offenders?
We the people are expected to obey the law; why don't we hold our servants (who are busy morphing into masters) to the same standard?
Finally, since the law is already being ignored, what makes us think that an amendment would not also be ignored? A prime example is the second amendment in New Jersey and many other states; what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?
This article is incorrect as far as the count goes.
For a Convention of the States dedicated to a balanced budget amendment only, the count is now 30 down, 4 to go.
If this bypasses Congress, who moderates the convention?
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.