“Convention of States” Resolution Defeated in Ohio

The New American ^ | June 6, 2022 | Peter Rykowski

[E. Pluribus Unum]

In a victory for the U.S. Constitution, a resolution applying for an Article V constitutional convention, or Con-Con, was defeated in Ohio.

House Joint Resolution 1 (HJR 1) and Senate Joint Resolution 4 (SJR 4) had been pending in the Ohio General Assembly. They follow the wording of Mark Meckler’s Convention of States (COS) application, urging Congress to call a convention to propose amendments “that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and Members of Congress of the United States.”

Despite the resolution’s attractive wording, any Article V convention poses a serious threat to the Constitution and the God-given liberties and limited government it guarantees. The New American has extensively reported on the dangers of a Con-Con.

The Ohio Senate General Government Budget Committee had been considering the COS resolutions. However, the General Assembly recessed without acting on them — despite Con-Con proponents’ expectations that the resolution would pass before the recess. Although legislators could attempt to pass the resolutions in the November/December lame-duck session, the likelihood of this is low.

Ohio Patriots Take Action

This pro-Constitution victory did not come without a fight. COS had put considerable effort into passing its resolution in Ohio. For example, it had held multiple events advocating for a Con-Con and ensured that the resolutions went to a committee that it viewed as COS-friendly.

Additionally, during the hearing intended for opposition testimony, the General Government Budget Committee allowed Meckler and another COS supporter to give rebuttal testimony, an uncommon occurrence.

However, these actions were no match to the efforts of members of The John Birch Society, along with other Ohio patriots, in educating legislators and the public about the dangers of a Con-Con and the benefits...

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Article V is not a "constitutional convention."

It's only power is to propose Amendments to the US Constitution which must be ratified in the usual manner.

[Jamestown1630]

From John Birch themselves:

"A constitutional convention is a method of amending the Constitution. In fact, it’s one of two methods the Founding Fathers put in Article V of the Constitution. Simply put, the convention method originates in the states, while the other method originates in Congress."

They're correct in their stance on the Con- Con. Especially in today's vicious atmosphere, it would be very, very dangerous.

[Leaning Right]

> Article V convention poses a serious threat to the Constitution... <

Huh? An Article V convention is in the Constitution. It’s part of the Constitution. This is like saying the 8th Amendment is a threat to the Constitution.

This country is deteriorating rapidly. So I say throw the dice while we still can. Call for an Article V convention. Take the chance.

[chickenlips]

The uniparty is elated that the proles will remain in serfdom.

[Fai Mao]

“This country is deteriorating rapidly. So I say throw the dice while we still can. Call for an Article V convention. Take the chance.”

There is no chance there. Article V would mean the creation of The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of America.

[MachIV]

This is the one issue I vehemently disagree with the Birchers on. Their only solution is for things to continue as is which the way things are going guarantees the end if the republic.

[Publius]

Article V ping. We lost this one. Ohio will not apply.

[Campion]

Especially in today's vicious atmosphere, it would be very, very dangerous.

Since the Article V convention has the same power to propose amendments as Congress, let it be noted that Congress being in session is "very, very dangerous".

[rktman]

Roger that. But regardless of what may have been proposed, what amount of time and how many iterations of the proposals would have to be suffered through before it was ever ratified? Of course with the current ‘badministration’, a proposal is as good as done to them. 😨😠

[Political Junkie Too]

From John Birch themselves: "A constitutional convention is a method of amending the Constitution..."

That's an incomplete statement. It is a method for proposing amendments to the Constitution.

Forget about the Birch shorthand, refer directly to the Constitution itself.

Article V:

...or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments...

-PJ

[Cen-Tejas]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_America_(organization)#Board_of_directors

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

The above link is to Wikipedia’s info on “The New American”.

Basically, it is a leftist “think tank” supported mostly by leftist foundations with The New York Times, Atlantic, Fareed Zakaria, Michael Crow (President of Arizona State University) and other lefties on it’s board.

The think tank started up in Oakland, California.

[Salvavida]

We could take the short cut and stop electing morons to Congress.

[Jamestown1630]

You’re right about that. We’re safest when they’re on vacation.

[Leaning Right]

There is zero chance that Congress will pull us out of this mess. That was proven back in 2017 and 2018, when the GOP controlled both Houses. They did nothing.

On the other hand, the majority of the state legislatures are Republican. Not many commies there. Unrestricted illegal immigration will eventually change that. So the time for an Article V convention is now.

[Amendment10]

Some patriots seem to think that an optional Constitutional Convention results in an amended Constitution. That is wrong.

A Constitutional Convention possibly produces a proposed amendment to the Constitution that each state can then choose to either ratify or ignore, optionally within a time limit.

And if enough states choose not to ratify the proposed amendment, then the Constitutional Convention that produced it was arguably a waste of time.

That being said, consider that all the states can effectively secede from the unconstitutionally big federal government by amending the Constitution with one amendment that does nothing more than repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments (16&17A), arguably little or no discussion required.

In fact, I challenge the states to process the repeal 16&17A Amendment as fast as Pelosi rammed unconstitutional (imo) Obamacare through the House.

Corrections, insights welcome.

Finally, Trump’s red tsunami of patriot supporters are reminded that they must vote twice this election year. Your first vote is to primary career RINO incumbents. Your second vote is to replace outgoing Democrats and RINOs with Trump-endorsed patriot candidates.

Again, insights welcome.

[Jamestown1630]

I may not be parsing your statement correctly, but the fact that Trump endorses someone doesn’t necessarily mean that they are ‘patriotic candidates’.

I’m a Trump fan and supporter, but I don’t think he’s always right about everything. (I’ve had real doubts about Oz, for instance.)

[cableguymn]

In a victory for the U.S. Constitution

---

It was no such thing

[cableguymn]

Republicans run more state legislatures then Democrats.

Wait..

I see your concern

[cableguymn]

Even more so since laws past by “con”gress don’t have to be ratified by the states.

[Jamestown1630]

‘Republican’ means nothing to me.

Patriot and originalist mean something.