Skip to comments.State Lawmakers Assemble at Mount Vernon to Discuss a Constitutional Convention
Posted on 12/09/2013 12:42:15 PM PST by Baynative
At a time when the federal government appears truly broken, state lawmakers have assembled to reclaim the power vested in the states by calling for a convention of the states as a means of creating constitutional amendments.
On Saturday, close to 100 legislators from 32 states attended a meeting in Mount Vernon, Virginia, where they discussed adding amendments to the U.S. Constitution. They would do so under the authority of Article V of the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at tpnn.com ...
All attendees were required to pay their own travel expenses in an effort to limit the possibility of outside interests. The Mount Vernon assembly was hosted by Indiana state Sen. David Long and Wisconsin Rep. Chris Kapenga and the attendees discussed a wide variety of issues including amendments related to term limits and limits on federal taxation and spending.
States are not used to working toward a common goal. With the focus solely on defining how a Convention of the States, including an Article V Convention for Proposing Amendments, would function, we are learning how to work together.
The assembly is a bold step towards increased state involvement in federal issues. However, the possibility of increased state involvement has begun rising in conservative circles as the tremendous dysfunction of the federal government has become entirely too-routine for many Americans to palate.
Obama may truly turn out to be a sort of “anti-Lincoln”. That is, before Lincoln, states had more power than the Federal Government. It was the more mortar that held the bricks (states) together. But after the Civil war, the bricks were replaced with marbles and the extra space filled in with FedGov.
Obama seems to be turning us back, intentionally or not.
I suppose every cloud has a silver lining.
The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and Ratification.
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.
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.
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.
Thank you, Mark Levin.
for just about everything wrong in America today, look closely at why it began and more than likely you’ll see that greedy lawyers (oxymoron) are at the very heart of all of it. Lawyers should never be allowed to become politicians at any level.
Way back in the mists of time when I was a newly minted freeper, I suggested that a law degree should be grounds for immediate disqualification for government employment.
“Congress is required to set a time and place for the convention.”
Antarctica, Feb 29, 2124
Hey, at least it’ll be summer...
I think state Sen. David Long is doing a fantastic job of organizing. Of course much thanks to Mark Levin and even some to Mike Church, Church had been pushing for a concon but this is better, I think. Thanks to all of them.
I keep thinking we need a cartoon of the Constitution on fire and a artcleV fire extingisher behind the—in case of emergency break glass.
Congress could try that, but then the states would be within their right to just call one a bit earlier. They would just be applying the Cosby Principle: "We brought you into this world... and we, damn it, can Take You OUT!"
The Marxist Trio...
Article V Ping!
I wish Ron Wood would just concentrate on playing his gittar and get out of politics!
Constitutional Convention? Are the Federal courts all closed or somethin’???
the magic number is 38.
That is the # of states which are required to change the Constitution.
With 38 states, ANYTHING can be achieved, such as removal of all of congress, the President, even the Supreme Court.
That is the ultimate power in this country.
You can bet that the left will be attacking the Article V movement as viciously as they have been attacking "Birthers" for the last five years. The first step will be to try to marginalize the supporters of the petition fro a convention of the states for a constitutional convention by questioning their sanity. The "Daily Kos" has already begun the assault.
Attracting flack from leftist quarters implies that the movement is making progress. Hopefully this is just the beginning of something big!
It is my opinion that an article V convention would be a fiasco. We should hope to God that such a thing is never convened, for it will only make things worse.
It is simply not reasonable to believe that Modern Americans will demonstrate more competence than did those who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787.
An Article V convention will put in charge the same sort of people who elected Obama. The very idea should be dreaded and feared.
If we can't even win an election for President, what sort of influence do you expect conservatives to have in an article V convention?
Hopefully they’ll incorporate his ideas.
Restoring our Framers’ federalism and much more will be depicted as an attack on “democracy,” as if that alone is the purpose of government.
And . . . as liberals always do, they will attack the persons and character of those who speak up and defend freedom.
The Obama droids will never join, but anyone else with a brain and eyes can see our rampaging dive into tyranny.
Your concerns are addressed at ConventionofStates.com.
Check out the FAQ.
You're not the only one to think that way, but it all depends the procedural rules that will govern any prospective convention.
Looking toward the future, one ground rule that will have to be insisted upon at such a convention is one vote for each state delegation. Even in today's political climate, it would be impossible for the left to get any of its pet amendment ideas approved by the convention if such a rule pertains.
That's why the left is nothing but fearful of the Article V convention to propose constitutional amendments idea. If they thought they would hold the upper hand at the convention, they would be promoting the idea with gusto. But they are doing just the opposite, attacking the Article V convention supporters.
Is there a list somewhere of which states sent representatives?
There is plenty of precedent for such a convention, and it is well documented. The Constitutional Convention was just one of about 3 dozen occurring in the 1750's thru 1790's. ALL of them, with one exception, were called with the rule being one state/colony one vote. The exception that occurred never met because it was boycotted by enough entities that didn't like going outside the standard practice of one-entity-one-vote.
How about a list of reps?
There were about 100 from 32 states:
Rep. Tammie Wilson Alaska
Rep. Wes Keller Alaska
Sen. Jason Rapert Arkansas
Rep. Randy Alexander Arkansas
Rep. Justin Harris Arkansas
Rep. Brenda Barton Arizona
Rep. Robert Thorpe Arizona
Rep. David Gowan Arizona
Rep. Stephen Humphrey Colorado
Rep. Lois Landgraf Colorado
Sen. Mark Scheffel Colorado
Sen. Scott Renfroe Colorado
Rep. Libby Szabo Colorado
Rep. Janak Joshi Colorado
Sen. Kent Lambert Colorado
Sen. Vicki Marble Colorado
Rep. Dan Nordberg Colorado
Sen. Larry Crowder Colorado
Rep. Chris Holbert Colorado
Sen. Kevin Grantham Colorado
Sen. Kevin Lundberg Colorado
Rep. Jim Wilson Colorado
Sen. David Balmer Colorado
Rep. Lori Saine Colorado
Rep. John Wood Florida
Rep. Terry Rogers Georgia
Sen. Bill Cowsert Georgia
Rep. Josh Clark Georgia
Rep. Lynn Riley Georgia
Rep. Andrew Welch Georgia
Sen. Sam Slom Hawaii
Rep. Dawn Pettengill Iowa
Sen. Sheryl Nuxoll Idaho
Sen. Marv Hagedorn Idaho
Rep. Vito Barbieri Idaho
Sen. Brandt Hershman Indiana
Sen. Jim Buck Indiana
Sen. Jim Smith Indiana
Sen. Tom Arpke Kansas
Sen. Mary Pilcher-Cook Kansas
Rep. Randy Garber Kansas
Rep. Kirk Talbot Louisiana
Rep. Roger A Jackson Maine
Sen. Mike Green Michigan
Rep. Tom McMillin Michigan
Rep. Jeff Messenger Missouri
Rep. Warren Love Missouri
Sen. Melanie Sojourner Mississippi
Rep. Jim Kasper North Dakota
Rep. Roscoe Streyle North Dakota
Rep. Laurence M. Rappaport New Hampshire
Rep. Jorden Ulery New Hampshire
Rep. Dianne Miller Hamilton New Mexico
Rep. James P White New Mexico
Rep. Nora Espinoza New Mexico
Rep. Paul C. Bandy New Mexico
Rep. Yvette Herrell New Mexico
Rep. Matt Lynch Ohio
Rep. Matt Huffman Ohio
Sen. Bill Coley Ohio
Sen. Gary Banz Oklahoma
Sen. Larry Grooms South Carolina
Rep. Anne Thayer South Carolina
Rep. Pete DeGraaf South Carolina
Rep. Scott W. Craig South Dakota
Rep. Hal Wick South Dakota
Rep. Manny Steele South Dakota
Rep. Jim Stalzer South Dakota
Rep. Dennis Powers Tennessee
Rep. James White Texas
Rep. Ken Ivory Utah
Rep. Kraig Powell Utah
Rep. David Lifferth Utah
Del. Jim LeMunyon Virginia
Del. Frank Ruff Virginia
Rep. Chris Kapenga Wisconsin
Del. Larry D. Kump West Virginia
Good intentions do not equate to competence.
December 09, 2013
Yesterday, approximately 100 state legislators from over 30 states met at George Washington's home in Mount Vernon, VA. The meeting's purpose was to begin drafting the procedural rules for a Convention of States. I was not present at the gathering (only state legislators were allowed to attend), but earlier in the week I had a face to face conversation with the leadership of the Mount Vernon Assembly. We are beginning to reach critical mass in our efforts to use Article V of the Constitution to rein in the power of the federal government. The Mount Vernon Assembly is one of the major steps in that effort.
While the work of this group of legislators cannot be binding until actually adopted by a Convention of States, it will be critical to have this work done in advance and to have a majority of the states endorse it in advance. This will ensure the Convention itself can avoid prolonged disputes on the rules and can get right to work on the substance of drafting amendments that limit the power of Washington, D.C.
But there is another, somewhat unfortunate piece of evidence that shows this project is reaching critical mass. Conservative critics of this idea have recently increased both the loudness and shrillness of their long-standing claims that this approach is a dangerous threat to our country through a runaway "Con-Con." Here is why their arguments are doomed to fail: 1. They are based on faulty history. The original Constitution was not adopted as the result of a runaway convention. Their entire argument is premised on this fallacy. 2. They have to convince state legislators that we can't trust state legislators. You see, state legislators control the Article V process from beginning to end. The "Con-Con" argument requires state legislators to believe that we should be afraid of state legislators who might abuse their power.
But what's the alternative? These fear-based arguments leave us in the utterly precarious position of trusting Washington, D.C., to right itself.
No one should trust Washington, D.C., more than they trust state legislators. But, at the end of the day, the audience that matters most is state legislators. State legislators certainly trust themselves more than they trust Congress and the rest of the crowd in D.C.
The fear-based arguments are being overcome by the developing consensus of conservative leadership. Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, David Barton, and I all stand shoulder to shoulder to say that we can trust the Founders own solution. And that solution is found in Article V--we need to call a Convention of States.
Join us. Make history. Save liberty.
Michael Farris is the Chancellor of Patrick Henry College and Chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association. He was the founding president of each organization. During his career as a constitutional appellate litigator, he has served as lead counsel in the United States Supreme Court, eight federal circuit courts, and the appellate courts of thirteen states.
Farris has been a leader on Capitol Hill for over thirty years and is widely respected for his leadership in the defense of homeschooling, religious freedom, and the preservation of American sovereignty. A prolific author, Farris has been recognized with numerous awards, including the Salvatori Prize for American Citizenship by the Heritage Foundation and as one of the Top 100 Faces in Education for the 20th Century by Education Week magazine.
Farris received his B.A. in Political Science from Western Washington University. He later went on to earn his J.D. from Gonzaga University School of Law, and his LL.M. in Public International Law, from the University of London.
Mike, and his wife Vickie, have ten children and 14 grandchildren.
I believe they are being placed into Regulatory positions away from any oversight.
In the basements and dark damp rooms below the structure of America.
Not a complete list. Rep. Drew MacEwen; Rep. Gary Condotta, both from the state of Washington are not on your list. There are more also.
Do Conservatives hold majorities in 38 state legislatures?
Thanks Baynative, additional:
I think I agree with him there. We either trust the Feds or the States. We dont have any other choice as I see it.
The list of attendees confirming by last Tue (I think) is on the website. But, several more people came at the last minute and because of occupancy fire codes they were not able to handle everyone who wanted in to the Mt Vernon assembly hall. I have written key sponsors for updates and heard that another conference in a larger venue is already being talked about.
Not now, I'll admit. But who knows what the future will bring? One thing you can say is that the left is further away from majorities in 38 state legislatures than backers of some of the "conservative" constitutional amendments are.
oops, that's not an oxymoron
Just having the discussion is a good thing.
Bay, talked to Drew tonight. He and Condotta were the only two reps. from Washington that attended! Where the Hell were those pricks who call themselves the “Titanium Trio” who like to consider themselves Liberty Leaders? Shheeezzz!
Will you please clarify or provide something to substantiate this claim?
On February 21, 1787 Congress proposed a Convention for "the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation"
Resolved that in the opinion of Congress it is expedient that on the second Monday in May next a Convention of delegates who shall have been appointed by the several States be held at Philadelphia for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as shall when agreed to in Congress and confirmed by the States render the federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government and the preservation of the Union.The rest is history.