Posted on 08/08/2022 8:05:26 AM PDT by tanstaafl.72555
Conservatives are just 15 states away from an unprecedented gathering that could rewrite large parts of the US Constitution and fundamentally change American life.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
For a Convention of the States dedicated to Georgia’s application language, which would re-balance citizens’ rights and state powers versus federal power, the count is 19 down, 15 to go.
For a Convention of the States dedicated to a balanced budget amendment only, the count is 30 down, 4 to go.
***
This is an old article that has been reposted.
***
This is the usual boilerplate I append to these threads for those afraid of the Article V process.
***
The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps:
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, except that a convention is limited to proposing amendments specified in the application and there is no such limit on Congress.
Direction:
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 once: to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition. A similar procedure was used to ratify the Constitution itself.
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 fourths of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
Forbidden Subjects:
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and two implicitly forbidden subjects.
Explicitly forbidden:
Implicitly forbidden:
Reference work:
Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers
Okay. I went and reread the Constitution on this. I see that is to provide amendments to the original document (as indeed all amendments do).
So, perhaps I am being hasty in my judgment.
Over the past several years, and my long life, I have become very suspicious of politician’s panaceas to problems...
As I said, conservatives tend to conserve rather than change.
Still, my warning! The power of the Deep State/DNCMedia/Communism/Leftists is very, very strong. They are led by a Dark Lord who hates God and His Creation. Good will prevail, but Evil has to almost triumph before this occurs... I read about it in the Holy Book.
At one time I was for this but now is not the proper time to make any changes.
That is the worst idea EVER! No 2nd amendment rights and free speach will be a thing of the past (It also already is).
That is an unbelievably good and info packed post!
having been a parishioner of a ny long iland megachurch in the 80’s, this is where i first heard of it, and then good ol pat robertson and others glommed onto it.
nowadays, with all this triggerin falderall, and my movin on, i do not think its dead, just under different hand signs these days.
when you hear some preacher come along and think he coined the term, ‘we are gonna take this country back, for gawd’, i heard that in the 80s.
“...Article of Confederation ... through it all out...”
-
The people looking at amending the ‘Articles Of Confederation and Perpetual Union’
did not throw it out.
They proposed a replacement, and after it was proposed,
all of the the states independently voted to approve it.
The Articles of Confederation were an unfixable mess.
“the far lefties have perverted it so bad it needs to be rewritten.”
True. The far lefties have perverted it. But that’s no reason to change it. It’s about perfect as it is, probably because (some of us believe) it was partially inspired by God at the outset.
All we need to do is stick to it as written.
Because you as the hard working American tax payer is the surety. Not a bar of gold.. You as an American keep the Fedzilla in check...sort of in check, it wobbles out of bounds occasionally..
Thanks for posting both the updates and the constitutional process.
I still think amendments are needed, but am uncomfortable in light of a takeover of our election system. It should be a given that enemies and traitors of the United States are not sitting idle, rather they are working diligently to perfect a plan to cheat and steal control of Congress this November.
Here is one new development to close the loop on the threat posed by after-election audits, having paper ballots match images and totals, thereby perfecting the crime.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4083024/posts
Although only 13 states are needed to block ratification of a reckless amendment proposed by left-moderate schemes, making it enormously difficult to ratify say, a Biden backed amendment, it is imperative that the current election system be thoroughly scrutinized and reformed before entertaining any amendments to the Constitution.
A multi-year commission is needed to investigate every facet of the November 2020 election, including involvement of Republicans. Further, such commission investigation should extend back before 2020.
At federal, state, and county levels, the infestation of vote and election fraud goes beyond 2020 leaving ordinary Americans with the shocking and sad awareness that many in elected offices today are occupied by illegitimate officeholders because of cheating.
We simply can’t have this.
Because state legislatures are crucial to ratifying amendments to the US Constitution, it is vitally necessary that state legislatures be scrubbed as well of any cheating, past, present, and future.
One amendment that will ferret out the cheaters will be an amendment to require fully effective, impenetrable, security in our elections, so that Americans will not be unduly concerned or convinced that their vote has no value. One such security approach that is easy to implement by every precinct in every state, with or without machines, is a specification of physical ballots and minimal ballot management such as tracking the number of ballots in circulation. Such a thorough approach to ballot security was proposed by AZ Rep Mark Finchum who just won the primary election for AZ SOS.
Minimum ballot security specifications and security management, once tested and proven effective, should then be proposed as an amendment to the US Constitution, making each State required to conform with minimal, effective ballot security.
It is true that the vast part of elections administration rests with individual States, but we are today confronted with technology that is able to subvert elections to the point of taking control of state and federal government.
Therefore, we need an amendment that focuses on effective election security.
There are TWO methods to Amend the Constitution: By vote of Congress or by the votes of the States themselves.
Amendments, not rewrites. First you write the Amendment, then act to approve it, then vote to ratify it (difficult!) before it takes effect.
There are some Amendments that Congress would NEVER vote for. Term limits, for example. Would Congress EVER vote to limit their own terms of office? Or a Balanced Budget Amendment? Or repeal the 17th Amendment and give the Senate back to the States where it belongs?
Congress won’t so we MUST! Start the Article V process by naming an intelligent, wise and cautious chairman and there will be no shenanigans. I propose Mark Levin for chairman.
Precisely.. What's the point of writing more laws when the stinking DC lawyers don't even make an effort to follow the ones already there...? I mean, what are the sheep going to say, "Yeah well, we're really going to make them obey the law THIS time.." (spit)
Article V The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress
If congress has no say in how the convention is organized, then why must congress call the convention at all? Makes no sense.
What if congress refuses to call a convention? What then?
tanstaafl.72555 wrote: “of course” (liberals get a vote)
Then, why do you think anything conservative will come from this?
>>A Constitutional Convention is playing with fire.<<
My understanding is a convention would be called to address a particular issue(s), not a open free for all.
Example: A convention agenda such as Balanced budget amendment and or abolition of the 14th amendment.
It would not be an open agenda. Anyone else have this understanding or am I in error.
That is the heated debate right now in this 138 comment thread. Some argue that the convention would only be for the specific purposes stated in each state's Article V petition, while others look to the wording of Article V and find no such limitation stipulated.
Since it's never happened before, nobody knows for sure.
I have come to believe that Obama did not win a second term in 2012 and that Bush did not win a second term in 2004.
Today we have an illegitimately elected Congress, illegitimately elected state, county and local governments, illegitimately elected school boards, and illegitimately decided initiatives, referenda and recalls.
We have to start over with voter registration and vetting.
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.