3.As mentioned previously, it WILL work, and it WILL WORK for both sides. To think that this is going to be all good for Conservatives and all bad for the leftists is just plain ignorant. Both sides would end up getting some of the things they want passed. Will they get everything? No, but both sides will come out of this with something.
Lest we operate out of ignorance, plain or elaborate, let us examine the arithmetic and which will lead ineluctably to the conclusion that there is no realistic chance whatsoever of leftist amendments getting through:
There are 99 houses in 50 state legislatures. Any leftist amendment would require only 13 of these legislative bodies from 99 to defeat ratification. In other words, three quarters of the state legislatures must ratify or 38 states. If 13 legislatures fail to ratify the amendment is defeated. Since ratification by legislatures requires both houses to consent, only 13/99 are required. That is very close to 13%.
After the last election Republicans control 69 houses of the 99 state legislative houses. Republicans control 31 of the 50 state legislatures. To stop any unwise or imprudent amendment would require only 13 of these 69 Statehouses (from different states) or about 19%, fewer than one in five.
The problem will not be to stop left-wing amendments but to pass prudent conservative amendments which restore the Constitution by invoking the Constitution.
If the Congress of the United States elects to have the ratification procedures conducted by conventions rather than legislatures, the method of selecting the delegates to those conventions would be chosen by the legislatures. If only 13 legislative bodies out of 99 object to the method chosen by the other body because it is considered to favor a leftist amendment, there is no ratification forthcoming from that state.
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.
Finally, this is only the last line of defense, there are innumerable steps along the way which make a "runaway convention" virtually impossible and render the need for the states to fail to ratify very likely superfluous.
2.Well, the fact is the Feds are currently doing what they want, when they want, and are completely ignoring the current laws, Constitution and BoR's, so really, what's going to make them suddenly adhere to new amendments????
4.It will work. But the fact is, yes, the Constitution and BoR's we have now work fine. The issue at hand is the fact that the Feds are IGNORING ALL OF IT. Adding to it won't make a difference.
The answer to your question is quite clear and it has been expressed many times on FreeRepublic: Article V proponents contemplate process amendments which are very very difficult to evade. For example, term limits, provisions that bureaucratic rulings not ratified by Congress are automatically voided, provisions for a combination of states to overrule Supreme Court rulings. These are but examples of process amendments which entirely change the balance of power and are very difficult to evade.
I might remind you that our Constitution of 1787 lasted until 1861, about 80 years and the post-Civil War Constitution operated effectively until the progressive era. There is every reason to believe that Article V reforms will have a long and effective life.
Or, we can continue to do what we are doing as the country cruises toward the cliff secure in the knowledge that we have not wasted any time in attempts to save our children's birthright.
