Posted on 08/26/2013 9:41:56 PM PDT by Dajjal
[snip]
The authority for such a procedure is Article V of our Constitution, so they are calling their plan of action an Article V convention. However, they are fooling themselves when they suggest that Article V creates a path to bypass Congress with a “convention of states.”
[snip]
If Congress ever decides to act, Article V gives Congress exclusive power to issue the “Call” for a convention to propose “amendments” (note the plural). The Call is the governing document that determines all the basic rules such as where and when a convention will be held, who is eligible to be a delegate (will current office-holders be eligible?), how delegates will be apportioned, how expenses will be paid and who will be the chairman.
[snip]
The most important question to which there is no answer is: How will convention delegates be apportioned? Will each state have one vote (no matter how many delegates it sends), which was the rule in the 1787 Philadelphia convention, or will the convention be apportioned according to population (like Congress or the Electoral College)?
Nothing in Article V gives the states any power to make this fundamental decision. If apportionment is by population, the big states will control the outcome.
Article V doesn’t give any power to the states to propose constitutional amendments, or to decide which amendments will be considered by the convention. Article V doesn’t give any power to the courts to correct what does or does not happen.
[snip]
The whole process is a prescription for political chaos, controversy and confrontation.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Let's stick with the political calm, concord and cooperation we've got now.
Yep.
Nothing like a slow, mind-numbing shuffle to the nightmare of mono-party politics leading the sheep to the communist utopia of elites ruling over the masses.
No controversy there, no sir!
Whoo-hoo!
Oh gee, as if we didn't already have that in spades, Phyllis.
wow. this isn’t rocket science. a simple analysis convinces me she and other’s like-minded are flat wrong.
the logic boils down to this for me: 13 states have a veto over any amendment proposed in the convention no matter how it’s set up. therefore, if the d.c. party is serious about getting anything passed, it would have to try to set up a way for each state to have an equal say. (win)
if the d.c. party was just trying to destroy the convention of states or circumvent it, well then perhaps 3/4 of states would finally get that we need a defacto “second” party to oppose the d.c. one, which is what we need anyway. (win)
or if the convention fails somehow. (no worse off than now)
or >3/4 of the states gut the constitution. (the worst case but very unlikely and still no worse since the republic is dead anyway)
no other logical cases come to my mind.
thus, imo, this is a no brainer. it’s a win no matter what happens. So for God’s sake, all conservatives should support an attempt to get 2/3’s of the states to petition for the article V convention, asap.
BS.
We will wind up fulfilling the "fundamental transformation" crowd's wet dream of rewriting the US Constitution.
Your logic is good except for one flaw in assumption:
> “if the d.c. party is serious about getting anything passed”
They’re not interested. Therefore, all the wins turn to ashes which is what they want.
Phylis’s flaw is she assumes the states will take it lying down. She’s right that Congress shall ‘call’ a convention upon applications of 2/3s of the state legislatures etc. but she is wrong in thinking that Congress calls the shots thereafter. Those applications aren’t empty and in fact there is beaucoup precedent in state legislature applications for amendments. In other words, the states will propose amendments.
So let the Beltway crowd try to dictate how it’s going to be under Article V. Do they think voters are going to stand idle while they trash the states?
I think after the critical mass is reached in the Article V movement that strong and forceful personalities and powers will descend upon the ruling class and confront them directly. That in itself will be historical.
I’ve been waiting to hear from Phyllis. She wrote powerfully against a “Con-Con” back in the 70s. She seems to have practically recycled one of those old columns. I don’t get the impression she’s digested Levin’s book at all.
She’s a darn smart lady. ....Ok, now I will read her essay.
The problem here isn’t one of laws. It’s a lack of honor, good will, and honesty.
We already have a Constitution. Is it being followed now? Why would we think that a new and improved Constitution would be followed?
No number of laws and amendments will corral evil. Evil will leak though every time. My epiphany came during the 2000 Florida recount. It was then that I realized that the Marxocrats were not people of goodwill. They were evil.
What this nation needs is not a constitutional convention. We need a spiritual revival.
I’ve known that we had a huge evil party since January 22, 1973.
But really, the Democrats have always been the evil party: slavery, Jim Crow, abortion, treason...
Thank Mark Levin and his new book.
This is the best way I know for liberals to repeal the 2nd amendment.
“Through this inscription I wish to enter my dying protest against what is called the Democratic party. I have watched it closely since the days of Jackson and know that all the misfortunes of our nation have come to it through this so called party. Therefore, beware of this party of treason.”
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2010/jun/18/man-curses-democrats-120-year-old-grave/
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
No we will not.
Any proposed Amendments MUST be approved by 3/4 of the States. That is not negotiable. While butthead states like New York and my own Massachusetts would gladly try to erase the Second, there is no chance they could obtain the needed three-fourths to ratify it.
The same goes for the fears of a Convention eliminating the Constitution. This is an Amendment Convention, not a Constitutional Convention.
My reading of Article V states that Congress "shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments" upon application of two-thirds of the states. I think Phyllis is taking a huge leap by suggesting that Congress would set all the rules, determine delegate eligibility, choose a chairman and decide how the Convention is funded. I'm not even sure if Congress is empowered to choose the time and place, since this Convention will belong to the States. (Remember, Congress is too cowardly to deal with any serious issues now, so you think they'll suddenly grow a spine?)
As I've suggested elsewhere ... name Mark Levin as Chairman from the start and most of our problems disappear.
Let's do this thing. Now. Start with just one Amendment (Term Limits would be nice) and get the process underway! We can start frying the rest of our fish later.
The nub of the problem began a hundred years ago; that is the rejection of federalism with the 17th Amendment. Since the constitution is the supreme law of the land, a return to federalism, repeal of the 17th means change in the supreme law.
Levin's additional amendments are also structural, and reinstitute the freedom promoting federalism of our framing era. They cannot be ignored.
Article V ping.
As Jackson said, “ “ John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”. That is exactly what will happen to any new amendments to the Constitution.
The nub of the problem is that the citizens, since the mid-1800s to early 1900s, were forced into socialist-entitlement and single payer K-12 schools where they learned to be comfortable with tution-free entitlement and the government compulsion to use it. These socialist-entitlment schools were never more than generically lukewarmly Protestant. For more than 40 years they have been godless. Progressives have **always** controlled teacher training and curriculum development and have **always** been pushing at the edges of societal norms and **always** pushing to undermine free markets, freedom, and limited government.
Do that for one to three generations and the nation gets Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Do for another generation and my parents generation thinks Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society is great idea. Forty more years of godless schools and we get a full-blown Marxist and possible foreigner and usurper as a resident of the White House.
THAT is the nub of the problem. More laws and amendments will NOT corral evil and spiritually DEAD hearts.
You couldn’t take the time to read the amendments you slough off.
That is **exactly** what citizens with evil hearts are doing **now**. That is exactly what they will do to any new and improved Constitution.
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.