[txnativegop]

I would prefer to solve the country’s problems without

resorting to this option, because there is no going back if

a con-con is called. And how can we be sure who will be

sent as delegates from “conservative” states?

[C210N]

And how can we be sure who will be sent as delegates from “conservative” states?

So, are you proposing that FR vet the delegates?

With the elected representatives (typically 2 year terms) of the states choosing delegates, the choosers are relatively close to "the people". I'd rather have these representatives choosing delegates to make amendments, as opposed to Congresscritters making amendments. Either way, the ratification hurdle is the same.

On the 17th itself, it breaks the checks and balances of the republic. With the 3 branches being the Federal, the States, and the People, the 17th steals the State power and hands it to the People, thus obliterating one whole strap of the "checks and balances". We're in uncharted waters today... and surely "The People" need to be checked and balanced as any other entity.

[Jacquerie]

The states will not send reps with plenary powers, but rather delegates with detailed commissions and felony punishment for disobeying. For instance:

Here is the Indiana statute that will govern commissions.