Article V Promoter Praises Democratic Leadership in Movement

The New American ^ | 28 June 2014 | Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

[VitacoreVision]

Constitutional convention advocate Mark Meckler praised the participation of Democrats and others in the movement.

The New American
28 June 2014

How would conservatives — good-hearted, well-meaning, Constitution-loving conservatives who have been persuaded to join the Article V Constitutional Convention camp — react if they knew that some of the leaders of that very movement were not only accepting the participation of liberals in the planning, but praising their contribution?

I suppose we’ll find out soon enough, as soon as Mark Meckler’s latest article begins being bounced around the Twittersphere and Facebook.
...

Full Story:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/18591-article-v-promoter-praises-democratic-leadership-in-movement

[oldenuff2no]

The main target of the liberals in this is to do away with the second amendment. Carry on at your own risk. This will go no where because in the end the red states will tell them to put it where the sun does not shine.

[VitacoreVision]

And Citizens United.

Example:

California seeks constitutional convention over Citizens United
http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/California-seeks-constitutional-convention-over-5579322.php

June 26, 2014

[buckalfa]

In my opinion, an Article V convention risks destroying our original constitution, which I consider to be a </>divinely inspired</I> document.

[hinckley buzzard]

The analogy is irresistible: The Roman Church's Vatican II was a good idea which was hijacked by cynical revisionists. One outcome was the epidemic of homosexuals flooding seminaries and the generation of predator priests which followed. A Constitutional Convention would be hijacked by the Left wing and would mean the total dissolution of the American idea. The Bull of Rights would be gone. Done. Not just the Second Amendment but the whole shebang.

[Da Bilge Troll]

"In my opinion, an Article V convention risks destroying our original constitution, which I consider to be a divinely inspired document."

Was all of it "divinely inspired", or just some of it?

[katwoman5779]

Fear mongers!!!! So I guess we should just sit back and let the runaway federal government do what they wish with no repercussions whatsoever. It doesn't matter who gets involved in the state convention process as long as the ball gets rolling. THERE CAN BE NO RUNAWAY STATE CONVENTION! Before you pass judgment on this process please ready everything you can get your hands on about it. You are doing a disservice to all the people that are working so hard to get this process started. It is about reducing the size of the big, bloated federal government. Congress will not fix itself. This Article five convention was written into the constitution by our founding fathers to stop exactly what is going on in Washington today. Please educate yourselves.

[Da Bilge Troll]

"California seeks constitutional convention over Citizens United"

And what would happen if a convention passed such a proposal?

[VitacoreVision]

Liberals are going to hijack the Constitutional Convention.

[Da Bilge Troll]

"Liberals are going to hijack the Constitutional Convention."

What if they did? What would happen then?

[Tzimisce]

I’ve been leery of this Constitutional Convention from the beginning.

The government ignores the Constitution as it’s written now!

What good are new rules going to do?

And now we learn that the left is taking over the movement - like it did with our government, our education system, our media, etc.

[Amendment10]

"... an Article V convention risks destroying our original constitution, ..."

Note that the product of a constitutional convention is not a new amendment to the Constitution. The product of a constitutional convention is a proposed amendment to the Constitution which the states later choose to ratify or ignore. And if the states choose to ignore the proposed amendment then the constitutional convention that produced it was arguably a waste of time.

In fact, regardless that the delegates to the original Constitutional Convention had signed the final draft, their signatures did not constitute a ratification of the proposed Constitution. The delegates then had to go to their home states and sell their states on the Constitution which the states ultimately ratified.

Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution

[Da Bilge Troll]

"What good are new rules going to do?"

What is your alternative? I'd like to see a plan! How's the status quo been working so far?

[Publius]

Article V ping.

[Tzimisce]

What is your alternative? I'd like to see a plan! How's the status quo been working so far?

I fear there's only one real solution left.

I'm not in favor of that - I'm just saying.

Just consider: the rules don't apply to liberals or their supporters. Look what happened to Chris McDaniel. He followed the rules and other guy broke all the rules and who's winning there?

Look at Lois Lerner and the IRS. They fixed an election and to date, no one's been punished.

Look at our southern border: immigration laws no longer matter or apply. But the laws giving those people welfare, social security, the privilege of using our schools, etc all still do.

The Ruling Class now thinks it can pick and choose what laws matter and which ones don't - like a neo-aristocracy.

And since those people keep getting elected (look at Chuck Rangel), they might as well be a nobility.

[Publius]

Here is my usual pedantic boilerplate to these threads.

***

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and 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.
• The Amendments Convention Method requires the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to petition Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. The states may request a single-subject convention or a general convention open to all subjects. 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, no more and no less.

Disposal:

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 twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.

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-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.

Forbidden Subjects:

Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.

Explicitly forbidden:

• No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning slavery or capitation taxes until 1808. We’re past that deadline.
• No amendment may be added to the Constitution to change the principle of equal representation in the Senate. So if California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit this principle to be violated, this provision in Article V would first have to be amended; it would be a two-step process.

Implicitly forbidden:

• 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”; therefore, the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place forever. Congress and an Amendments Convention have exactly the same Proposal power; therefore, neither Congress nor an Amendments Convention can start over. Both bodies can only propose amendments. To permit the drafting of a new constitution, this provision in Article V would first have to be repealed; it would be a two-step process.

I have two reference works for those interested.

The first is from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative pro-business group. This document has been sent to every state legislator in the country.

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

The second is a 1973 report from the American Bar Association attempting to identify gray areas in the amendatory process to include an Amendments Convention. It represents the view of the ruling class of 40 years ago. While I dislike some of their conclusions, they have laid out the precedents that may justify those conclusions. What I respect is the comprehensive job they did in locating all the gray areas. They went so far as to identify a gray area that didn't pop up until the Equal Rights Amendment crashed and burned a decade later. Even if you find yourself in disagreement with their vision, it's worth reading to see the view of the ruling class toward the process.

Report of the ABA Special Constitutional Convention Study Committee

[GraceG]

[ Liberals are going to hijack the Constitutional Convention. ]

Because a Convention of the States to PROPOSE New Amendments (which congress already can do and has done in the past) and a Total Constitutional Convention ie. (Write an entire new constitution) are the exact same Damned thing?????