Really?
Posted on 05/13/2014 5:52:30 AM PDT by JOHN W K
ROFLOL!
And those are elected by....?
As I understand it, the Article V convention meets to address specific items. Its topics can neither be added to nor deleted from. Every state agreeing to the Article V convention must have passed language almost identical.
==
So, what are items that these state legislatures who are calling for the Article V are tending to present?
The items seem to vary from state to state.
==
The current Constitution grew out of a similar convention that met to correct and review some items in the previous convention. Behind closed doors, the attendees came out with a new constitution.
That is what bothers many: once the doors close, will the agenda change and will the results be changes to The Constitution go beyond the intent of the Article V?
==
Additionally, it seems that the attendees are ‘appointed’ by the state governments, not elected by the populace. The ‘people’ have little say, but as SCJ Roberts said, ‘you voted for these people, so you have to live with whatever they do.’
==
I do not trust the concept, unless and until the Article V pushers publish a list of the ONLY agenda items that ALL attendee states have agreed to consider.
So far, each state has been voting on its own lists.
I don’t trust politicians even at the state level to pass a list of constitutional changes that benefit the populace over the politicians’ agendas.
The FED only enforces laws they want, now. How is that going to change, even if an Article V convention does pass a list of consitutional changes?
==
Unintended consequences.
An Article V could be rife with them.
/johnny
/johnny
For the first time since joining FR, I am scratching my head about the apparent ignorance on an issue among many FReepers. I suspect a great many people have not read or are not familiar with Levine's proposal/book.
This is generally a bullet smart, patriotic and active crowd. I'm proud to associate myself and participate. But as I scroll through some of the comments here, it is apparent, we (collectively) need to humbly educate ourselves on this issue. WE are pushing in all directions here. As such, I presume the Tea Party faithful must be doing the same. It might explain why this is taking so long to gain traction.
Really?
It’s worth a shot. I appreciate Levin starting the conversation on this. Nothing ventured nothing gained and all that. What other options are there? We have a corrupt political class whose only purpose is to perpetuate itself, and a runaway judiciary which abandoned all precepts of proper constitutional interpretation. In the end there are only two outcomes:
1) The convention of the states succeeds and we get the amendments that restore our Republic.
2) It fails in which case we’ve lost nothing and we continue our decline with a second amendment solution as our backstop.
It’s a win/win either way.
The Delegates sent to the convention in 1787 ignored the Articles of Confederation, which were then in effect, and by its very wording was forbidden to be altered but by a unanimous consent of the States. Instead of following the Articles of Confederation, they arbitrarily decided that the new constitution and new government they created would become effective if a mere nine States ratified what they did.
The convention, if called, could propose that a mere majority of the States are needed for ratification and this would be in line with progressives who call our system a "democracy" rather than a constitutionally limited system of government.
JWK
At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.
You’re encountering the stealth liberals that populate FR. Article V terrifies them outright because it is the first, solid, incontrovertible pushback they’ve ever encountered and don’t quite know how to deal with it.
Johnny Boy here is a perfect example. He is completely immune to facts and history. Typical leftist being outed.
Then its already done?
problem solved,? budget balanced,? flat tax?, all done? and time to move to other problems?
Great news. I need to listen to Mark more often to keep up on ‘the news’ That Mark is magic.
/johnny
JWK
Per post 69. “The convention, if called, could propose that a mere majority of the States are needed for ratification”
WTF! This guy claims to know the constitution and then writes this?
Hey. Don’t argue with him. Like any good lib the constitution says what he says.
Big deal
A number of states (Dems) passed laws giving all there POTUS electors votes to the national popular vote winner.
Does that mean those states will change the whole system for all the other states too?
This is Fantasy island waiting for the magic unicorn to save us all.
It does not such thing!
Here’s a thought: Since the COS is an effort that is spearheaded by state legislatures whose proximity to the electorate is considerably closer than anyone in DC I think it could reasonably be argued that whatever the COS comes up with could truly be considered the ‘will of the people’ more so than the Washington establishment.
Assuming that the end result is detrimental to the United States as a whole, we could sit back and say, “Okay this is what people want and we’ll move on from there.” Either way the logjam of the status quo is removed which affords us the political, societal and cultural avenues to consider other options. I don’t know about you but I’m tired of the stalemate of the current political climate.
Either way we have an obligation to try.
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.