Posted on 11/07/2013 3:03:07 PM PST by Jacquerie
INDIANAPOLIS - The leader of the Indiana Senate has invited lawmakers from every state to join him Dec. 7 at Mount Vernon, George Washington's Virginia home, to discuss the state-led process for crafting amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Senate President David Long, R-Fort Wayne, asks in a letter written to fellow legislative leaders that each state send a bipartisan group of three delegates to the "Mount Vernon Assembly."
He said the meeting will lay the groundwork for a Convention of the States that would, when established by Congress, propose amendments to change various provisions of the Constitution.
"The authors of the Constitution included a state-led amendment option as a check on a runaway federal government," Long said. "The dysfunction we see in Washington, D.C., provides an almost daily reminder of why this option is needed now more than ever."
The initial meeting won't actually consider potential amendment topics, Long said. Instead, it's intended to set up the rules to be followed if and when a constitutional convention is called.
There are two authorized methods for changing the nation's fundamental governing document. The only one that has been used is when two-thirds of Congress proposes an amendment and three-fourths of the states (38 states) ratify it.
However, the Constitution also permits what has come to be known as an "Article V convention," named for its placement in the fifth section of the Constitution.
Under that scenario, two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) ask Congress to call a Convention of the States for proposing constitutional amendments. If the convention approves an amendment, it then can be ratified by three-fourths of the states and added to the Constitution without congressional approval.
Because an Article V convention has never been called, there are no clear rules on how it would begin — does every state have to pass an identical convention request? — what rules the convention would follow or whether it could be limited in scope.
The primary criticism of the convention idea is the possibility that a "runaway convention" will scrap the entire Constitution.
In fact, the current U.S. Constitution emerged from a convention called to recommend fixes to the Articles of Confederation, America's first constitution.
Long tackled the "runaway convention" issue earlier this year for Indiana by winning approval of two new laws that severely restrict the ability of a Hoosier delegate to a future Article V convention to make decisions outside the explicit instructions provided by the General Assembly.
An Indiana delegate that acts contrary to the wishes of the legislature not only is automatically replaced, but also faces up to three years in prison.
"I was proud to see Indiana lead on this issue in the most recent legislative session and I will continue to support it as a legitimate tool of the states to push back against federal overreach and restore a more proper balance of power," Long said.
He said the Mount Vernon Assembly will devise a "prudent and cautious process" other states can follow to ensure an Article V convention remains focused on specific subjects.
Long has indicated he supports a convention that would propose amendments limiting the power of Congress to impose taxes and regulate business.
More... Look at how many legislators are lawyers. Bar associations in the states also pushed hard for the divorce/cohabitation paradigm and for causing other problems we’re seeing now.
If you want to see better senators in Congress, for example, wait for the cuts against big spending and decreasing political power of troublemakers of all kinds. Assembly members of most of the states would only cause more trouble. Their interest is big government. For now, socialists have much money and time for political activities. In the near future, they won’t. Just wait for now.
Can a Convention to peacefully abolish the union be held? I`d support that, it`s goal: To allow any state or group of states to peacefully secede and form their own independent states with full status as sovereign nations.
“The Supreme Court has already rewritten the Constitution.”
“I would rather the people do it through their elected representatives.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
You are spot on, the Supremes HAVE rewritten the constitution, only a law professor or a willfully blind and ignorant liberal could believe that The Patient Abandonment and Unaffordable Health Destruction Act is actually in accord with the constitution. The question I and many others ask is why should we offer them a new one to rewrite? Are they more likely to abide by a new constitution than the old one?
The current constitution places strict limits on the power of the federal government but it is ignored. The courts have indulged the fantasy that there are two clauses which say in effect, “Do whatever you damned well please, we spent all that time writing this document just for show, feel free to trample it into the dirt and disregard it.” If they don’t find permission in the welfare clause or the interstate commerce clause they find it in a “penumbra” or some other nonsense, they are not above saying that left is really right, up is down, freedom is slavery, war is peace etc. They claim the “right of privacy” forbids laws against abortion even though nowhere in the constitution is a right to privacy mentioned in any way, shape or form. Then they turn around and say in other decisions that you have NO RIGHT OF PRIVACY.
If we held a ConCon and voted to return to the original Articles of Confederation (as if that would ever happen) it would mean nothing as long as we have corrupt lawyers interpreting the law. Before the ink was dry they would be claiming that the federal government has the power to do whatever a bunch of damned fools can think up.
If you are looking for the word "privacy," you're righ. If you are looking for the concept of privacy, tthere are several places.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the 3rd amendment is an implied right to privacy in one's home by virtue of prohibiting the quartering of soldiers (government agents) during peacetime. This has become more relevant today from discussions that Obamacare and OSHA give the government the right to inspect your home at any time for health and safety reasons.
And, of course, the 4th amendment is about being secure in one's person and documents, meaning that the government can't search without a warrant based on probable cause and a description of what and where to search.
The 5th amendment protection from self-incrimination and presumption of innocence is a form of privacy in that the government must find evidence of your guilt without storm-trooping into your home to do it.
-PJ
Yet when it is time to collect the income tax where is your right to privacy?
-PJ
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.