2018: David Horowitz: Conservatives Need to Amend the Constitution Now

Patheos ^ | February 1st 2018 | David Horowitz

[Jacquerie]

For the past several years, the Convention of States Project has been gathering concerned citizens from every pocket of the country to urge state legislators to use this long-neglected constitutional “check” on the power of Washington. With Republicans in control of 33 state legislatures and Trump in the White House, now is the time to make this happen. The Project’s model resolution, which has been introduced in 48 states, to date, calls for a meeting of the states to consider, and potentially propose, amendments that would achieve one or more of three objectives

Impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, Limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and/or Set term limits on federal officials and members of Congress.

While it is no surprise that Marxist-leaning groups would fight, tooth and nail, to resist any plan for breaking the federal government’s virtual monopoly on policy-making, all conservatives agree that this monopoly is a perversion of our federal system. But sadly, the Left’s propaganda and junk history have brainwashed some conservatives into opposing the states’ use of constitutional power to check federal overreach.

Having spent much of my adult life documenting various tactics used by the radical Left, I can’t say that I was totally surprised when I recently learned that the Left was, in fact, the original source of the fear and misinformation concerning Article V today, or that they are now escalating and publicizing their opposition to conservatives’ use of the process to restrain federal power.

In their efforts to frighten citizens and state legislators away from the one process powerful enough to “drain the swamp,” the conservative naysayers refer to the process as a “constitutional convention,” or “con-con,” slander the Founding Fathers by maintaining that the Constitutional Convention exceeded its authority, and prophesy that if 34 state legislatures should ever be so reckless as to hold a meeting to discuss proposing amendments, then Christmas will be outlawed, the Second Amendment deleted, and the nation’s Capital moved to Los Angeles.

They have overlooked a few key facts about interstate conventions, in general, and Article V, in particular. First of all, they have overlooked the fact that the state applications that trigger the convention can limit the scope of the convention however they choose. This is inherent in their power of application.

The sad thing is that the conservative opposition groups don’t even seem to realize that in stoking fears about an Article V convention, they are reading right out of the Left’s playbook. While they tell the conservatives on their direct-mail lists that they are working to save the Constitution from being rewritten by George Soros and his ilk, Mr. Soros smiles, breathes a deep sigh of relief, and toasts to their success.

Never mind how these conservatives missed the Memo in which the 230 most liberal, Marxist-leaning organizations in the country explicitly stated their opposition to the Convention of States Project.

These fringe conservative groups, fighting hard against the broader conservative movement to oppose this constitutional safety valve, are blocking the one politically feasible means the Right has to reverse our nation’s slide into socialism. So long as the John Birch Society, Eagle Forum, and certain representatives of Concerned Women for America are fighting this fight for him, Mr. Soros can save his billions to send more statists to Congress, where they can continue to exercise powers never actually given to Congress in the Constitution,but blessed by an activist Supreme Court.

JBS hasn’t always opposed it. In fact, in the late 50’s and early 60’s, JBS Founder Robert Welch and many JBS chapters lobbied for passage of state resolutions to trigger a convention to propose the “Liberty Amendment.” Today, however, JBS seems to have forgotten about all that. It now uses the Left’s label of “con-con” to refer to the process, and fiercely opposes any and all efforts to implement it.

It is important to point out that in opposing the Article V convention process, Eagle Forum and John Birch Society have placed themselves in opposition to a long list of prominent conservatives that includes Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint, Jeb Bush, Allen West, Ben Shapiro, Bobby Jindal, Greg Abbott, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Michael Farris, and many, many others. As more and more well-respected conservatives sign on to the Convention of States Project, I suspect that Eagle Forum and John Birch Society will grow increasingly uncomfortable withstanding on the side of George Soros, Democracy 21, and Planned Parenthood.

I would remind them that there is no shame in changing their position. After all, I was once a radical Leftist, until I learned the truth. There is, on the other hand, considerable shame in letting fear and ignorance triumph over reality, reason, understanding, and cold, hard, historical facts.

[Jacquerie]

Your opinion of the states’ collective accomplishments is irrelevant to their authority under Article V.

[Cboldt]

The link you sent does not work.

Meanwhile, the CCP constitution has as much religious freedom as the US constitution.

http://en.people.cn/constitution/constitution.html

Article 2. All power in the People's Republic of China belongs to the people.

Article 5 .... No law or administrative or local rules and regulations shall contravene the constitution

Article 37. The freedom of person of citizens of the People's Republic of China is inviolable.

[Jacquerie]

Try the link again. It just worked as it did before.

But, here is the url: http://articlevblog.com/2016/03/in-praise-of-the-soviet-constitution/

[semimojo]

Read further in the article.

I was responding to his argument that the applications could limit the topics. I don't think they can with any effect.

He makes a further point that individual states could pass laws to punish a delegate who voted for an unauthorized proposal, but that's speculation and it's very unlikely many states would do it.

More to the point, the topics that are authorized by the applications are so broad you could figure a way introduce almost any issue under their umbrella.

[SuzyQue]

Why not?

[SaxxonWoods]

Here are 18 that don’t look likely to ratify anything worth ratifying. It only takes 13.

NY, MA, MN, NJ, CA, VT, MI, IL, WA, OR, WI, NM, ME, HA, NH, MD, CT, DE.

[Jacquerie]

At the link: . . . “the commissioners to the convention act as agents of the state legislatures who appoint and commission them. Any actions outside the scope of that authority would be void as a matter of common law agency principles, as well as any state laws adopted to specifically address the issue.”

IOW, the states won’t send schlubs off the streets with plenary power, nor will they send “representatives.” The relationship between the delegates and their state legislature is that of attorney to a client.

[gspurlock]

The Article V Convention is the only means of the will of the People overriding the will of Congress. That is what it was designed for. If we are too timid to use it, we deserve what we get.

[Hostage]

Scare tactics include “Runaway Convention” which is impossible because if it were possible, the Left would have done it themselves. If the Left could take over an Article V Amendment effort, they’d be pushing it nonstop.

What conservatives must understand is that states with small populations are equal to states with large populations under an Article V process. Wyoming is equal to California, West Virginia is equal to New York. This why the United States was founded as a Constitutional Republic.

So Conservatives have the power potential via Article V NOW, they just need to unify and figure out what they need to do. One thing they could do for example would be to pass an Amendment for 34 States to impeach and remove a President after a voter referendum on recall. Another example could be to ban the use of digital election systems unless certified by a group of citizens selected at random for an election jury in conjunction with other factors.

[Jacquerie]

Given the rats’ clear intention to destroy the middle-class and establish an Orwellian hell on its ruins, opposition to using our Framers’ gift of Article V is nonsensical.

History will not look well on a people who abandoned themselves and their posterity to misery.

Have you read Mark Levin’s “Liberty Amendments?”

[Hostage]

10 years ago the number of such states was less than 11. What changed?

Electronic voting systems.

[Jacquerie]

The states are anathema to the Left. Since 1913 they sought and eventually achieved their power through corruption of federal institutions rather than dead with individual states.

Yeah, one state one vote. Wyoming = Californicate. Heh, heh.

There is so much rot, I believe an annual COS that convenes a week or so after the Scotus delivers its latest nonsense every June could do wonders.

[Lurkinanloomin]

No one will uphold the Constitution as written, so amending something that isn’t being paid any attention to is kind of pointless.

[Publius]

Here is the usual pedantic boilerplate that I post to these threads for those who don't understand the details of Article V. I've had this post vetted and corrected by a retired professor of constitutional law.

***

THE ARTICLE V AMENDATORY PROCESS

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps:

1. Proposal;
2. Direction;
3. 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 of each house.
• The amendments convention method requires the legislatures of two thirds of the states to pass resolutions directing Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments. These resolutions are called applications. 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, except that a convention is limited to proposing amendments specified in the application and there is no such limit on Congress.

Direction:

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 once: to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition. A similar procedure was used to ratify the Constitution itself.

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 two implicitly forbidden subjects.

Explicitly forbidden:

1. No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning the slave trade or direct taxes until 1808. We’re well past that deadline.
2. 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:

1. 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;” so the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place.
2. A convention for proposing amendments is limited to the topics authorized by state applications.

Reference works:

Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers

***

This is the current lineup of two applications that might make it to the finish line.

15: AL, AK, AR, AZ, FL, GA, IN, LA, MO, MS, ND, OK, TN, TX, UT.

For a Convention of the States dedicated to Georgia’s application language, which would re-balance citizens’ rights versus federal power and state power, the count is 15 down, 19 to go.

For a Convention of the States dedicated to a balanced budget amendment only, the count is 30 down, 4 to go.

[qaz123]

Two things would change the trajectory of this country in no time.

Repeal the 17h Amendment

End the fallacy of Birthright Citizenship and make it retroactive to October 3, 1993.

[Kevmo]

Better yet, let's secede. From my home page

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Secession

It's time for us to jettison those who reject our national values because there's no changing them. Time to secede.

We should extend the invitation to secede on a county by county basis.

While we're at it, since we'd be forming a new country, we should extend the invitation to counties in Canada and Mexico as well.

Note that this option is becoming increasingly popular.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4000029/posts

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Jacquerie]

By your calculation a COS can do no harm.

[Jacquerie]

The 17A pulled the keystone from our Framers’ governing form.

Progressives pushed for direct senatorial elections since the 1870s. The intent was that the interests of popularly elected Senate would align with the House of Reps.

The progs were right. Having transformed the US overnight from a federal republic to a democratic republic, it is a wonder that we have lasted so long in our corrupted condition.

All good things are possible upon repeal of the 17th.

[Publius]

Progressives pushed for direct senatorial elections since the 1870s.

And Andrew Jackson pushed for it in his first State of the Union letter in 1829. In that letter he also pushed for abolition of the Electoral College.

[qaz123]

Said it better than I could have. Nice.