[wideminded]

It is very unlikely that the collective wisdom of the people at a new constitutional convention will equal that of the founding fathers.

[Publius]

It is not a "constitutional convention." Here is the usual boilerplate I post 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 apply to Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. 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 unless every state deprived of that right approves. If California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit violation of this principle, every state would have to ratify the amendment, not just three-fourths.

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.

Reference works:

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

State Initiation of Constitutional Amendments: A Guide for Lawyers and Legislative Drafters

[Cen-Tejas]

Well, with all due respect, I agree with you about our guys and gals today being dumbasses compared to the founding fathers..............BUT, with a BIG BUT!

Let’s assume (I don’t know anything about you) your a typical working man, you live in a nice home in a nice neighborhood and you and your wife have a good job.

But, you and your wife have run up credit card balances of one BILLION dollars. WHAT DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO you do?

If your thinking that some how the 535 utterly CORRUPT imbeciles in our congress will fix the twenty trillion debt and rising, I have a bridge to sell you. It ain’t gonna happen. Either fundamental changes get made and we make them stick, or we are going down! Soon, you will push a wheelbarrow full of dollar bills to the local grocery store to buy a loaf of bread! Already happening in Venezuela and elsewhere.

[Da Bilge Troll]

"It is very unlikely that the collective wisdom of the people at a new constitutional convention will equal that of the founding fathers."

Why makes you say that? I don't believe the framers were super-heroes out of a comic book. There's no reason their wisdom could not be duplicated.

[Jacquerie]

<>It is very unlikely that the collective wisdom of the people at a new constitutional convention will equal that of the founding fathers.<>

Maybe, maybe not. Times make the man, and delegates to a state convention will know that history will cast a critical eye on their decisions. Fortunately, the delegates won't need to start over. There are specific ills in our government that require a cure, such as repeal of the 17A.

Another benefit:

The enormity of an Article V state convention cannot be overstated. In the weeks leading to it, the nation will be consumed like never before in actual debate over the purpose of government and how far it has strayed from its designed purposes. A 21st century peaceful rising of the sovereign American people would be the equivalent of the 18th century "shot heard round the world," for it could mean the rebirth of the American tradition of free government. Not seen since the ratification debates of 1787-1788, anticipation of a state amendments convention will engender national discussion over the foundational maxims of the American republic.

Most importantly, the three branches will be put on notice that the sovereign people are ready and able to overrule Rome-on-the-Potomac, ready to judge the scotus judges, and are perfectly willing to restore free government.