House Budget Committee chair renews call for constitutional convention of states to address US debt

Fox News ^ | March 15th 2023 | Unknown

[Jacquerie]

Following the release of President Joe Biden’s budget proposal, House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Jodey Arrington, R- Texas, is proposing a means for voters to have a say about rising debt and soaring inflation.

Arrington introduced a resolution calling for an Article V convention of states. More than the required two-thirds of states previously called for either a fiscal responsibility amendment or a balanced budget amendment in the 1970s. Arrington’s legislation says, Congress "appears to have failed in its constitutional duty to count applications and call a ‘convention for proposing amendments.’" He introduced a similar measure last year, but now Republicans hold the majority in the House.

Congress has only a ceremonial role in approving an Article V convention since the 40 states have already approved it, and the Constitution says Congress "shall" call a convention if two-thirds of the states call for it.

[Jacquerie]

Constitutionally, Congress must call an Article V Convention of the States.

Of course, it means nothing to Article V opponents.

[Jacquerie]

Article V ping!

[Brian Griffin]

Congress could and should save the banks by submitting to the states a fiscal year amendment limiting responsible federal elected persons to their current terms if a federal fiscal year ends in the red.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

Except during national emergencies…and the “COVID emergency” would last forever.

[JoeVortex]

I cannot imagine what a complete circus an Article V convention would turn into.

This sounds like a distraction, similar to the Balanced Budget Amendment.

It is something a politician advocates when they want to sound conservative, but in reality, are too chicken to fulfill their responsibilities.

Like proposing a balanced budget then going on record and voting for it.

[nagant]

Be careful what you wish for. The problem with a Constitutional convention is that it may consider passing any amendments it chuses.

[Jacquerie]

The problem is otherwise patriotic Americans like you who don’t know what they’re talking about.

But hey, thanks for sharing your feelings.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

“But don’t you dare limit social security!” “Don’t you dare touch defense.” “Ukraine!” “Climate change!”

[Jacquerie]

Your post is irrelevant.

Two-thirds of the states called for a convention.

[Publius]

This is the usual boilerplate that I append to these threads for those who don't understand the Article V process. I've had this post vetted by a retired professor of constitutional law to make sure I'm not talking out of my hat.

***

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 work:

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

[Publius]

The foundation contends Congress has only a ceremonial role in approving an Article V convention since the 40 states have already approved it, and the Constitution says Congress "shall" call a convention if two-thirds of the states call for it.

My understand is that 10 states rescinded their applications, and the count is now down to 30. Back when Boehner was Speaker, he sent House legal counsel to the Archivist's office to audit any and all applications for a convention starting with the first two applications from 1789. While the number of applications reached the threshold in the 1970s, I'm not sure that the number today is sufficient to call a convention.

A reading of Hamilton's last Federalist Paper makes it clear that Congress' role is ministerial and ceremonial. Congress must call a convention and has no discretion in the matter. The convention call is Congress simply setting the time and place. Once the states assemble in convention--remember that the convention is the agent of the principals, who are the states--they have sufficient authority under contract law to set up their own rules, providing that they stay within the bounds of the convention call.

I think another audit of the Archivist's spreadsheet is in order to make sure that the number of states applying for this particular convention is correct.

[SgtHooper]

You can count on Pence affirming the count. spit.

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

“The problem with a Constitutional convention...”

It’s not a Constitutional Convention, despite someone’s idiot headline.

“...is that it may consider passing any amendments it chuses.”

It doesn’t pass amendments. Good lord. All it does is propose amendments, any of which still need to be ratified by 38 States. Same as if Congress proposes amendments.

[Basket_of_Deplorables]

Please join the Convention Of States (COS) movement, run by Mark Meckler, here:

https://conventionofstates.com/

Lots of educational material there. There’s a lot of us pushing hard for it!!!

(Keep an eye out for the paid disinformation posters here on FR. They always call it “A Constitutional Convention,” (It Is NOT) which is the best sign they’re disruptors. America’s enemies fear a COS more than anything, including Trump.)

[Hiddigeigei]

"I cannot imagine what a complete circus an Article V convention would turn into."
Our Constitution has been corrupted enough already. I can't imagine what a can of worms a constitutional convention would be.

[Jacquerie]

<>I can’t imagine what a can of worms a constitutional convention would be.<>

I believe you can’t imagine. It is because you haven’t educated yourself.