Posted on 07/17/2014 11:53:03 AM PDT by dignitasnews
As the November 2014 elections draw closer, Republicans are fixated on taking control of the Senate and Democrats find themselves focused on picking out china patterns for a presumptive Hillary Clinton inaugural ball in 2017, conservatives should consider the fact that a Constitutional Convention is very much within reach in 2015. Once the votes are counted, the Republican Party may just control the needed number of statehouses across the country to invoke the rarely discussed provision set in Article V the US Constitution which requires Congress to call a convention of states to propose amendments. Better still for conservatives, the numbers just might be available to get more than a few of these passed. As an extra bonus, Congress would be obligated to call the convention and hold no power to limit its scope.
Article V of the Constitution provides two methods in which a constitutional convention may be called for. The first states that should two-thirds of both houses of Congress find themselves in agreement on a given issue, an amendment may be called. This of course, in the wisdom of the framers, is a very difficult prospect particularly given the current political climate. The second, however, is more realistic option in our times and as one surveys the political map on the state level, a viable option in 2015. In addition to the congressional option, should two-thirds of the states apply for a convention, Congress "shall call a convention proposing amendments."
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; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. Because the constitutional convention method has never been called there are plenty of questions in regards to the logistics and procedure. That said, this was originally to be the only process in which the Constitution may be amended. It was only after a delegation led by Alexander Hamilton argued that Congress too should have the power to do so under certain circumstances. It was then proposed by James Madison to remove the States power to propose amendments, until George Mason voiced his opposition to this plan, arguing that if the national government were to ever become oppressive, the void of a state process would render the people helpless. Thus, the two-thirds options was worked drafted and approved.
The latest legitimate attempt of the state method was the Balanced Budget Amendment. This was a long and drawn-out process in which North Dakota first applied for the amendment in 1975, while Missouri became the 32nd state in 1983, but it lost momentum just when on the cusp of victory. Speed in politics is important and although it may be idealistic to believe a variety of states can accord with equal swiftness, given their differences in personality and procedure, it is a potentiality of such unique importance it is the duty of conservatives to organize and prepare to apply the needed pressure to conservative leaders within the various states to make this a priority and drive the debate. In the modern age of communication, there are less logistical hurdles to overcome and no legitimate reason this can not be accomplished in under 24 months. Many within conservative circles have advocated for such a direction, a leading voice in this movement being radio-host and writer Mark Levin.
But to even get there we need the numbers. Although statehouse races garners far less attention than the House or Senate, it is on the state house level where the Tea Party influence has been most pronounced and their success has been key to the GOP’s current dominance in this arena. And because a Constitutional Convention is a state-driven process, conservatives will have greater representation. In the drive to thirty-four states, conservatives have good reason to engage in key races on a state level. To date, Republicans hold full control of 26 state houses, compared to only 18 under Democrat control. Five states are split between the state legislatures and state Senates, while Nebraska holds non-partisan elections for these offices, although this is widely considered “Republican country.”
What has Democratic Party officials particularly nervous is not just the race for the US Senate, but the very real possibility that Republicans, led by the insurgent Tea Party movement, will emerge from the primary season even stronger and together with establishment candidates will sweep to victory in a number of contested state house seats and have an insurmountable majority following November battles. Democrats are in danger of losing their slim majorities in eight key states, particularly West Virginia, Nevada and Colorado. Among the five states currently with a split in party majorities Kentucky, Iowa and New Hampshire appear to be leaning toward a GOP takeover. Should just these six states move over to the Republican column, they would hold full control of 32 state governments, with Nebraska giving them a virtual 33rd given their voting tendencies. This leaves seven states in which a lone upset moves one more state into the GOP column or agree to debate, discuss and vote on amendments to the constitution on a variety of issues of sincere concern to the American people.
Should these numbers become a reality, conservatives will have the opportunity to truly open up the national debate on issues ranging from abortion, to guaranteeing the integrity of our elections, illegal immigration and an overhaul of our legal immigration system, taxation, health care as well as Constitutional rights as related to both free-exercise of religious liberty and self-defense. While the American public at large is often split on these issues, the Progressive-left opposition on these position are largely centered in urban strongholds on both coasts and New England. Should the 34 needed states file applications and amendments are then proposed, three-fourths of the states will need to ratify. That means 50.01 percent of the people within states need to agree to the measure. Taking another look at he map, if crafted properly there seems to be little that the Progressive elites of New York, Chicago, Los Angeles or San Francisco can do about it.
Progressive-liberalism has been able to infect our republic mainly due to the disproportionate power and influence of these media centers on our culture and the national discussion. As such, power has increasingly found it center in Washington DC. at the expense of individual liberty. Conservatives find themselves with a unique opportunity to restore "power to the people" without the obstruction of both the liberal intelligentsia and the feckless nature of Congress. With a strong turnout of conservatives in a handful of Republican leaning states, a Constitutional Convention is very much within reach.
By Paul M Winters Editor in Chief Dignitas News Service
Sources:
NationalArchives HarvardLaw USConstitution CNSNews MarkLevinCNSInterviewVideo PJMedia (via YouTube)
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
Nothing will change until patriots and good, liberty-loving people resign themselves to the necessary and inevitable drastic measures required. The Founding Fathers thought it worthy to place their lives on the line for. I guess we don't value those principles any longer to that extent.
Tell me how your revolution would work. It isn’t an unusual refrain at FR.
If point Z, the endpoint is restoration of freedom, what are some of the intervening events, beginning perhaps with point A?
Actually, with a Republican congress, this would be the fastest way to restore order, effectively neutering Obama for his last two years.
Convention of States - Alabama Way to go Alabama! A good introduction.
'Convention of states' to rein in government? Another great summary explanation.
The Case for an Article V. Convention. Fantastic explanation of Article V convention to the Mass State Legislature.
I would recommend watching the above three videos first and then:
Convention of States Lots of information here.
Article V Project to Restore Liberty Another good source.
A Summary of Mark Levin’s Proposed Amendments by Jacquerie
Chapter 1 of Mark Levin’s Book, The Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin, Constitution Article V, and the Liberty Amendments
Rep. Bill Taylor introduces a Convention of States
Mark Levin Article V, Liberty Amendments youtube video hub
Three hour video of C-Span interview with Mark Levin
Gaining Steam? Nearly 100 Lawmakers Descend on Mount Vernon to Talk Convention of States The beginning.
Convention to Propose Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Other Way to Amend the Constitution: The Article V Constitutional Convention Amendment Process
Friends of Article V Convention Links
Ulysses at the Mast: Democracy, Federalism, and the Sirens' Song of the Seventeenth Amendment by Jay Bybee. Repeal the 17th!
Article V Convention: Path of Least Resistance by Robert Berry
The Final Constitutional Option
Article V Handbook - for State Legislators An important resource.
State Legislators Article V Caucus State Legislators, Join up at this site!
Send this list of links to your State Representatives and Senators here: Contact your State Legislators.
Sample Letter to state Representatives regarding the Convention of States Project and also, Talking Points. Both from Here.
Excellent Article V Letter to a State Assemblyman by Jacquerie
Let’s all work together to get this going.
The Federal Government is broken. We owe it to The Founders and ourselves to attempt a rational Article V amendment process. If it doesn't work, or is hijacked, then fine, it's on to what we're all expecting anyway, revolution. It's your call America.
The President of the United States, in coordination with central American governments, leads an invasion of tens of thousands across our southern border.
He will suffer no political retribution or even effective resistance.
Presidential tyranny isn’t a fuzzy possibility; it is here.
We should fear an amendment convention of the states?
My revolution?
You just made the case why a revolution won't ever be realized.
Okay. I'm the nutty fringe. Pay no attention to me.
In a nutshell, that’s exactly what this would (could) do.
For all those wringing their hands about the GOPe...you may have a valid point, but there’s a bigger point, as I see it. A Constitutional Convention is our last chance to save the country as we know short of armed conflict.
In that context, I think it is worth a try.
or weasel word the 2nd amendment out of existence
Okay, I’ll reword my question.
When Americans rise up, how will events conclude in restoration of freedom?
You really think a new Constitution or new amendments will mean anything to the same politicians that ignore all the rest of them?
I don’t
in this environment with “progressives” in control, the worst idea in the world is a Constitutional Convention...
The only worthwhile amendments are structural, like those proposed by Mark Levin.
why? what will they eliminate? constitutional government?
Am I mistaken in my understanding that the scope of the Convention can be *limited* to only those Amendments that the State conventions approve for the Convention? TIA
When Congress issues a Convention Call, something Hamilton said in Federalist #85 was mandatory upon the receipt of petitions from two-thirds of the states, it places the description of the scope taken from the petitions into the language of the Convention Call. Under the Principle of Agency, Congress merely acts as the Secretary, issuing an Agency Agreement, which is the Convention Call based upon the states' petitioning language.
The Amendments Convention is the Agent. Under the Principle of Agency, the Agent is bound by his Agency Agreement. That agreement in turn is based upon the language of the petitions from the states.
Anything introduced at an Amendments Convention that is outside the scope of the Agency Agreement -- the Convention Call -- is out of order.
Thank You very much for that very informative (and educational) reply!
Even Adams and Franklin realized that declaring independence wasn't enough; that they needed a document that made plain for all to see the acts of tyranny.
If, as you suggest.. it does nothing more than expose for all to see the way the politicians see the rule of law and the Constitution, it will serve a purpose.
It will justify what some say is the inevitable conclusion: armed conflict, civil war, revolution.
Having followed the procedures in Article V and then having it ignored, will lay the groundwork for legitimizing any armed rebellion that follows if and when some states resort to defending their sovereignty as a last resort.
-PJ
Jefferson and those guys also did not think that document would be worth crap after a generation or two. They thought new revolutions would be needed every so often.
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.