Posted on 07/01/2015 3:56:31 PM PDT by betty boop
Well the voters are electing liberals and RINOS. That is what is actually happening on the ground despite what you and I wish to happen.
Well dear plain talk, such folks are acting outside of the rule of law. In so doing, in the end, they are only shooting themselves in the foot, or worse.
What victories in 2010? What has changed? The Neo-Communists/Dims/so called Liberals are running us headlong off of a cliff, with bankruptcy, national dissolution, and poverty for the masses at the bottom. The plan from the Repuklicans is to AID and ABET the process. We have no more time to wait. Radical ideas must be used and amending the Constitution is the right plan for the job. We must trust ourselves, and ORGANIZE. Keep those out that hate our founding. OVERWHELM the system, this time with ideas and ideals that work and are everlasting.
I’m watching Texas. If they secede, I’m over there.
Well over half of the states opposed both Obamacare and his illegal amnesty in court. I'm aware of two states taking steps to counter the effect the fag marriage Scotus decision. State legislatures are coming to realize they have the power to arrest and reverse the trend.
I suspect most Article V opponents emotionally refuse to believe that America is not exempt from historic cycles of freedom to slavery, of the sort Aristotle described unless we actively work to stop the process. They believe we can find deliverance if we only elect the right person for president. Our history has proved them to be fools.
Article V opponents equate a state amendment convention with our corrupted congress, a congress in which our freedoms and rights are easily traded away today for money, media support, and reelection tomorrow.
They are wrong. Article V opponents are stuck in static analysis.
Men are shaped by the institutions in which they participate. The congressman who would sell our rights today would never think of harming his family. Michele Bachmann was run out of congress for being virtuous in a corrupt institution. Had she joined the sleaze and venality that typifies congress, she could be there today. What I describe is identical to the behavioral difference between men in strip clubs and church.
The states will send serious men/women of character and judgment armed with commissions to promote their state supported amendments. Delegates to an amendment convention will be unconcerned with that which drives congress: money, personal power, and reelection will not be their focus or interest.
We can have every expectation that state delegates will rise to the occasion. They will understand the gravity of their assignment and conduct themselves in a manner precisely opposite that of congress.
And Prof Natelson's website: Our American Constitution
Both are worth a look-see.
***
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.
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:
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:
Implicitly forbidden:
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
I, too, am coming to the opinion that a convention of the states is worth a shot. We’re being ruled by an oligarch, anyway, as Scalia so ably points out. The one safety valve in the convention of the states is 75% ratification.
13 states can block anything, good or bad. Surely there are 13 states who would oppose giving away the farm???
FWIW, I agree with you about the 17th amendment.
**Alabama
**Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
**Idaho
Illinois
**Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
**Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
**Mississippi
Missouri
**Montana
**Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
**Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
**South Carolina
South Dakota
**Tennessee
**Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
**West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
“We are witnessing a runaway Government every day of our lives. How could an Article V convention of the States be any worse? I fail to see it.”
The Article V process will be co-opted by state legislators beholden to / will capitulate to Obola aligned leftists and result in monstrosity.
Can anyone actually imagine leftist groups, media, academia, entertainment industry, big business, and foreign interests Not trying to influence enmass Article V proposal language and vote outcomes?
Anyway, a Article V convention will be successfully painted as a radical states right movement which will hurt the 47%.
I hate to say it, but I see it as a huge complex waste of political time, capital and limited public attention span.
It’s Far better and faster to show up in Huge numbers with a unified message that threatens the status quo and future election prospects.
A loud solid united conservative revolution movement better come first before any herding cats effort of coordinating a majority of state’s to soberly revise our constitution.
Conservatives need an solid plank, message, and effective messenger that will speak for all of the majority of Americans, that are mad as hell and aren’t going to take it any more.
Point out what a damned shame shape our state is in, and what must happen to correct it.
Thanks for the article, but it misses a big problem. Anything that a covention of states passes would be subject to ratification by 3/4 of the states. Any meaningful change could be scuttled by 13 states. States like VT, CA, IL, and MA. The math of article V just doesn’t work. That said, I don’t think it’s harmful. So if folks would rather do article V stuff then watch cable, then have at it.
Political change is going to come as a result of the secession of one or more states.
Political change is going to come as a result of the secession of one or more states.
But first HALT ALL remittances to the federal givernment..
and demand a redress of grievances..
Could Only work if several States did this..
When the feds denied this action.. only one thing then is possible..
Actually we elect Pubbies that tell us they agree with us and then support democrat positions, judicial and other nominations, and do not control federal regulators. So most of the people we elect are lying to us straight to our faces. I don’t believe you can blame the people quite as much as is done on FR.
“Protests and non violent civil disobedience would likely scare politicians into better behavior.”
check out Charles Murray’s new book “By The People” he outlines how this can be done on a nationwide scale.
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.