By either procedure the odds of a liberal amendment getting past so many conservative legislative bodies in so many states is both arithmetically and practically remote. You are assuming there would be integrity in the voting and legislative processes. I no longer think this can be assumed as a matter of course. Look at how Obama won his primaries in 2008, how he won the election in 2012, how Cochran won his primary this year.
The following is an excerpt from the HISTORICAL EXHIBITION PRESENTED BY THE GERMAN BUNDESTAG
The Enabling Act of 23 March 1933
The political situation in the final stages of the Weimar Republic was confusing and unstable. Changing cabinets and coalitions and political, social and economic crises were the order of the day. . . .
The next step towards the ‘Führer state’ was the abolition of parliamentary democracy and the rule of law. Although the NSDAP-led government had a stable working majority in the Reichstag, the National Socialists aspired to formalise their absolute de facto political power by means of an amendment to the Weimar Constitution. Through the ‘Act for the Removal of the Distress of the People and the Reich’ of 24 March 1933, more commonly known as the Enabling Act (Ermächtigungsgesetz), which consisted of only five articles, the government of the Reich was to be vested with almost unlimited powers to enact laws, even in cases where the legislation encroached on core provisions of the Constitution.
Since the Act entailed an amendment to the Weimar Constitution, its adoption required both a two-thirds majority in Parliament and the presence in the Reichstag of at least two thirds of all its members. The prospects of achieving the requisite number of votes were good, since the mandates of the 81 deputies from the Communist Party of Germany had been rescinded under the Reichstag Fire Decree. Moreover, many Members of the Reichstag had already fled or been imprisoned or murdered. . . .
Only the deputies from the Social Democratic Party of Germany voted en bloc against the bill, in spite of the massive intimidation by the SA and SS, whose troops had moved in to surround the Kroll Opera House, where the Reichstag was now meeting. . . .
__________________________________________________________
Excerpts from a WND article:
Michele Thomas, a professional photographer in Hollywood, told WND in an exclusive interview that her resistance to the Obama campaign made her a target of intimidation. “I have received death threats from Obama’s people,” she said. “I think I was called a ‘racist’ a thousand times. If you didn’t stand for Obama, you were a racist. It was a way to intimidate you.”
. . .
Thomas’ charges were affirmed by a Hollywood producer who spoke to WND, Bettina Viviano, . . ..
. . .
What [Thomas] witnessed while volunteering for Hillary in the Nevada Democratic Party caucuses eventually turned her into an activist.
“The Obama campaign people were stealing the caucuses – throwing away votes, intimidating people from entering the caucus locations,” she said. “It was very systematic. The Obama supporters got control over the caucus packages and they manipulated the vote.”
________________________________________________
Moreover, even assuming integrity in the process, the 13% argument cuts both ways. It would be just as easy for leftists to defeat any useful amendment as it would be for conservatives to defeat leftist amendments.
Therefore, a convention has no chance of doing any good, and a non-trivial chance of doing great harm.
You are quite correct, the forces of inertia are massively aligned against effectuating new constitutional amendments by either side by either process. That is why it has long been my belief that the Article V amendment process will only succeed in the wake of some national event, what some have described as a "black Swan" event. We should get ready for such an event because in the absence of reform the country is hurtling ever faster toward a reckoning.
I do not underestimate the malevolence of the other side, I simply say that a good general chooses the ground on which to give battle and I would much prefer to fight in the legislatures of the 50 states than in the federal legislature or in the United States Supreme Court. But make no mistake, fight we must.
The left is fully capable of bringing on a constitutional amendment-in fact it is already doing so-they are fully aware of their options under Article V acting through the federal legislature or the state legislatures. Right now they are prudently acting under the federal legislature. Failing that, they will continue on as they have been, amending the Constitution in the courts, in the Oval Office, in the bureaucracies and we will go on debating the dangers of Article V and decrying the unfairness of it all.
I advocate taking hold of the events before they take hold of us.
