It’s an open question whether states really have the moxie required to come up with a better formulation. Phyllis may be right on practical grounds rather than theoretical ones.
As C. S. Lewis put it, those who twisted under the old system will twist under the new one as well. Giving up a lot of stuff that they have been accustomed to getting from an Uncle Sugar will be required. Are states willing to go lean for the sake of a meaningful political reformation of what the USA is about?
I posit that the ultimate engine is going to have to be divine, not political. Almost any constitution will suffice if the people are vibrantly serving God. Any constitution will fail, if the people are shrugging their affairs off to the devil.
And they don't want to rewrite it; they want to REINSTATE it.
Article V ping. A useful article about Ms. Schlafly’s opposition to a Convention of the States.
The convention of states is a lunatic proposition. We have enough problems with unconstitutional politicians without sending a bunch of delegates from Illinois, California, Massachusetts, Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, Oregon, Washington to finger, lick and play with our constitution. I cannot believe that people are so stupid as to think delegates can be bound by mere words.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798 John Adams
Actually I think the Convention is a pipedream, unless, of course Trump manages to survive to be elected and has enough of a majority vote to overtop what will be the most intense vote fraud since the USSR and then himself pushes for a Convention. It is otherwise a pipedream because the next president will be a dictator perfected where the current dictator is still not entirely in control. I don't qualify thatby saying the next Democrat because the nature of the office has transformed by Congress ceding all its power to the President directly or through the Agencies. Congress cannot take that power back nor can it be given back. A president that tries to be COnstitutional will be overwhelmed by the Agencies which will become a collective dictatorship and politics thenceforward will be backstabbing battles for control of the Bureaucracy - the Agencies.
The Constitution was made by and for Anglo-Americans. It's provisions could be stretched to accommodate West Europeans by reason of similar cultures and work ethic.. The current demographics are Third World parasites who will seek ever expanding "Freebies." LEAVE OUR CONSTITUTION ALONE. Study the background and proceedings of the First Convention.
I believe Article V is the only hope for change.
The operating system needs to be corrected.
I wouldn't call it a "con," but I doubt they're entirely serious. If you want an 18th century constitution, you need an 18th century population that puts 18th century demands and restrictions on government. If you can't get that, if people want more from government and don't want to live with government on an 18th century scale, you won't get what you want, and are better off sticking with what we have -- making it better to be sure, but not scrapping it thinking that you'll get anything like the Constitution of 1787 to replace it. Because you won't.
Ping
bkmk