Posted on 03/22/2014 3:17:01 PM PDT by The Bat Lady
Ever since 1998 when I first learned of the Convention process (Precinct, County, State and then National) I have gone to my precinct and county conventions. Sometimes I have gone on to the State Convention but I like being involved in writing the State Republican party platform.
Each convention works the same way, elect delegates to go to the next step and pass resolutions to go to the next step. This is the true grassroots.
Today was my 1st County convention in my new county that I moved to after “Going Galt”.
Mostly things went well, a few didn’t work out as planned and so wanted to share for those of you who still have your primary ahead of you. Learn from my mistakes.
I start writing down the things I’m upset about National and State that I might want to write a resolution about. The “Whereas” part gives the background and reasons for the “Be it resolved” part. “Be it resolved” should be an action or strong statement of position. Granted the Texas party platform is bigger than it should be just because we have to state we are against stupid things the democrats come up with.
This year the Republican Party said they were not starting over (like they do every 2 years) but to only send up what is different, new or a change from what is in the 2012 platform. I had not read the platform for several years and just wrote the resolutions off the top of my head.
The Pct convention is the easiest place to get your resolution into the process. The Pct. convention is usually the same night as the primary on Election Day. If you vote early still go to your polling place that night at 7p or 7:30. Everyone who shows up gets to vote on the resolutions to go forward to County level.
All the many county pcts. resolutions will end up at the resolutions committee who puts same ones together and this year threw out the ones already in the platform and even one that no one liked. I asked to be on that committee. (He who will be willing to work usually will get in). What is left was presented to the county convention for pass or fail to go to State. I wrote 12 resolutions and 7 were passed to County, 2 combined with others of the same idea, many were in the platform so I did pretty well.
WHAT I FORGOT was a resolution to call for an Article V convention to propose amendments. I put it in at the County level and it was VOTED DOWN. Now I can TRY to get it into the State resolutions committee but that is much harder!
What has been in the State platform for many, many years is “repeal the 17th amendment” I also put that one in at the County level, it was voted on and it was VOTED DOWN!
So my advice to you if your primary is coming up. Get online and find your State’s party platform, READ IT, mark it, what do you like? What do you NOT like?
What makes you mad on the news lately? IRS scandals? Benghazi? Fast & Furious? Want impeachment? Parents not having the authority for their kid’s medical treatment? Want your State to call for an Article V convention?
WRITE A RESOLUTION! Go to your Precinct convention, county convention and get them passed.
Granted it seems our elected politicians don’t always hear and obey but down the road it can happen eventually. It surely won’t if we never ask or demand or state our position.
Here is how I worded, feel free to take for your own, re word here or there. It is now public for Freeping in your State. :)
RESOLUTION
To call for an Article V Convention to Propose a Balanced Budget Amendment and Further Fiscal Restraints upon the U.S. Federal Government
Whereas, the federal government is out of control and though politicians promise to cut spending and cut taxes they continue to rise no matter which party is in power.
Whereas, The Founding Fathers gave us the answers to our problems continuously in the U.S. Constitution
Whereas, in Article V. of the Constitution it gave 2 ways to propose amendments to the Constitution:
1. by means of 2/3rds of the Congress (who will not give up the power) and
2. by 2/3rds of the States to call for a “Convention for proposing Amendments”.
Resolved we urge Texas Legislators to join Georgia and call for a Convention of States for the purpose of proposing amendments to the U.S. constitution only to limit the power of the Federal government and return the power to the States where the Founding Fathers meant it to be.
Be it further resolved that the Convention be limited to restoring the American Republic by Amendments that:
1. Establishing Term Limits for members of Congress,
2. Repealing the 17th amendment and restoring the Senate to be mindful of the States
3. Limiting federal spending and taxing
4. Protect private property
5. To grant the States the authority to check congress and regulatory agencies.
6. To protect the vote
Unfortunately, people seem to believe that one tea party victory (Ted Cruz) means the 17th amendment shouldn’t be repealed. The fact that most state legislatures are republican and would probably result in a republican majority in the senate seems to fall on deaf ears.
I am afraid that I do not share your eagerness for a ConCon.
Though I can tell your intentions for such a convention are pure and noble, at this juncture, I think it would be opening the door for the progressives and libertarians to cause much damage.
Had a gal in my pct. that had never gone to any convention but willing to learn. I told her wear red/ white and blue, any pins, flag pins and bling that you can find.
It just makes it lots of fun.
I also took elephant necklaces to share so my section looked very festive!
Congratulations!
Every FReeper should know this process thoroughly and take an active part.
You know those Iowa caucuses that everyone hates? This is exactly what they are: People gather together in their own neighborhoods to discuss issues, pass on platform resolutions and elect local officers and delegates to the next level.
Once every four years, the caucuses take a few minutes for a casual, NON-BINDING presidential preference poll and outsiders go crazy! Meanwhile, the real business is conducted like always.
God bless you for your template. And I thank God that my state of GA was the first to call for Article V and the limitations it imposes.
“would be opening the door for progressives...”
That is my fear as well. It seems that something that starts out as a good thing is perverted to bad ultimately.
I fear that the libs will be in the majority in the not too distant future.
That is because you think it is a Constitutional Convention and when I read the Constitution Article V it says that "on the application of 2/3rd of the States shall call for a convention for proposing amendments... then have to be ratified by 3/4th of the States"
With most of the States republican I think most delegates would be republican (or conservative even better) but then the wording has to be the same back to every state and ratified by 3/4ths.
I truly think that the founding fathers KNEW that we would have elected officials ruining the USA like they are and they put this fix in JUST FOR THIS TIME.
I just wish they would have put the term limits and balanced budget in it at the beginning. But that doesn't mean that we can't at this point.
Do you have the original wording? I looked for it and couldn't find much.
No one is calling for a constitutional convention. Read 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
The convention is for “proposing Amendments.”
The majority of state legislatures are republican controlled. Chances are that progessives wouldn’t get much traction and I am not as afraid of libertarians as you seem to be. But perhaps we should just stay with the status quo and let the current government destroy the country without trying anything new. Remember the definition of insanity!
I fear you are RIGHT!
Maybe we should not do anything, maybe we shouldn't fight to our last breath, maybe we should just pull the covers over our head and let them have it.
Maybe NOT. Maybe we should use the fomula the founding fathers gave us to fight back. Maybe?
Hey, I listen to Levin as well..and read Liberty Amendments. :) And did a lot of research on the subject.
I guess a ConCon is worth a try as long as everybody realizes that the same weapon can be used by the other side.
I fear that unless we take the media and take back the institutions of “greater learning” the basic problem will still exist. One outlet lies and promotes their agenda. The other does the same...they just have the advantage of polluting the minds of our young people. I’m looking for the answer to the basic problem.
I found this over on the Convention of States Project website. It's the exact wording from the text of the legislation that's currently working it's way through the legislatures of just about every state...
Application for a Convention of the States under Article V of the Constitution of the United States
Whereas, the Founders of our Constitution empowered State Legislators to be guardians of liberty against future abuses of power by the federal government, and
Whereas, the federal government has created a crushing national debt through improper and imprudent spending, and
Whereas, the federal government has invaded the legitimate roles of the states through the manipulative process of federal mandates, most of which are unfunded to a great extent, and
Whereas, the federal government has ceased to live under a proper interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, and
Whereas, it is the solemn duty of the States to protect the liberty of our people— particularly for the generations to come—by proposing Amendments to the Constitution of the United States through a Convention of the States under Article V for the purpose of restraining these and related abuses of power,
Be it therefore resolved by the legislature of the State of ______:
Section 1. The legislature of the State of ______ hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.
Section 2. The secretary of state is hereby directed to transmit copies of this application to the President and Secretary of the United States Senate and to the Speaker and Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and copies to the members of the said Senate and House of Representatives from this State; also to transmit copies hereof to the presiding officers of each of the legislative houses in the several States, requesting their cooperation.
Section 3. This application constitutes a continuing application in accordance with Article V of the Constitution of the United States until the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the several states have made applications on the same subject.
You’re right... but we just have to keep working on them. I’m thinking that as the movement gains momentum over the summer, and as we get closer to the next legislative session in the states, the numbers will start to add up, and finally these guys all wrapped up in the GOP Establishment will pay attention. And if they don’t, they can’t say they weren’t warned.
The majority of state legislatures are republican controlled. Chances are that progessives wouldn’t get much traction and I am not as afraid of libertarians as you seem to be. But perhaps we should just stay with the status quo and let the current government destroy the country without trying anything new. Remember the definition of insanity!
/////////
First, thank you for the education on an Article V convention: I stand corrected.
However, I for one am not convinced that our troubles today stem with flaws or deficiencies in our Constitution, so much as in the caliber of individuals being elected to office. The Article V idea seems more like a clever “work-around” to our true problem of an inert, disinterested, uneducated, immoral, and unengaged electorate that habitually places corrupt and immoral people in office. Here in San Antonio, our very Liberal mayor was elected with about six or seven of the electorate turning out. Unreal. Would passing new amendments make people get off their derrieres and vote? Somehow I doubt it.
Moreover, the current regime in Washington has made it clear that it will do whatever it pleases, regardless of what the law and/or Constitution says. As long as our elected leaders are lawless, an Article V convention will be of little import.
We know where Ted Cruz stands on virtually every issue. The same is true of most Democrats. The moral vacuum on the “Republican” side is in dire need of being filled. We do not know where many of them stand from issue to issue, because they can apparently be bought and sold.
With regard to Libertarians, I do view them with a great deal of precaution and circumspection.
Actually, they aren't calling for a Con-Con, and by that I assume you mean a Constitutional Convention. What's being discussed here (and across the nation) is a Convention of States to Propose Amendments to the Constitution (CoS) as spelled out in Article V.
On the other hand, a Constitutional Convention is a convention called to write or create a constitution. There is no such authorization to be found anywhere in the Constitution for a Con-Con... I mean, why would there be? We already have a constitution.
I think it would be opening the door for the progressives and libertarians to cause much damage.
I understand your concern, and it's a good one! Just about everyone I know who either is or was against an Article V CoS opposed it for that same reason... they were afraid that leftists extremists were going to come in and take over the convention and re-write the Constitution. Once they understood what a CoS actually is, however, most have radically changed their position.
What most didn't understand is that the CoS is called to propose amendments, not to ratify them. It's an assembly of delegates sent there from all the states to propose, debate and compile a list, or a bill of particulars, that must be sent out to all the states for ratification. This is exactly the same process the states used to achieve ratification of the first ten amendments, our Bill of Rights.
The convention itself would probably take months, but ratification in all 50 states could take years. Remember, these are merely proposals. Once the convention has done its job and adjourned and everyone has gone back to their home states, nothing will have been changed.
Since it takes 38 states to ratify any proposed amendment, once folks realize that that's a pretty high bar, it usually puts their fears to rest. If they're still a little uneasy, even though the odds look pretty good, I ask them to do the math. Instantly they realize that the flip side of that coin is that it only takes 13 states to stop any craziness in its tracks. Pretty much everybody can come up with 13 states off the top of their head that wouldn't just stand by and let anyone wreak havoc on the Constitution.
The best part of all of this is the Red State / Blue State breakdown. The CoS is called for and run by delegates of the states. Congress-critters are not involved, nor can they be by law. So right now, there are 26 state legislatures that are controlled by conservatives, and 18 that are not. The convention itself might be comprised of hundreds of delegates, but it's a one-state, one-vote system. That's how almost all conventions work. I'd say that's a pretty comfortable cushion that's very likely to increase after the midterm.
One last "security measure" that's built into the CoS process is the subject of the convention. There are only two requirements or restrictions that Congress can place on a CoS - one of those is the time and place, and the other is the subject matter. A CoS must state what its purpose shall be. In this case, the CoS that's currently being considered in virtually every state legislature in the country is limiting its proposals to the following subjects:
- Proposed amendments that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government,
- Proposed amendments that limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and
- Proposed amendments that limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.
So, any proposal by any delegate that would fall outside of these parameters would be declared by the chairman of the convention to be “void ab initio,” or dead on arrival, and there would be no further discussion of the matter. And since the majority of delegates attending the CoS are going to be from Red states, you can bet that the Chairman is going to be one of them, and will be well-versed in parliamentary procedure.
Anyway, I didn't mean to run on like this. It's just a subject that I'm very passionate about, and I become enthused when I see someone who shows genuine curiosity and concern. Bottom line here, this is our country... all of ours.
I truly think that the founding fathers KNEW that we would have elected officials ruining the USA like they are and they put this fix in JUST FOR THIS TIME.
I just wish they would have put the term limits and balanced budget in it at the beginning. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t at this point.
//////////////////////////
In all seriousness, best of success, if you can pull it off.
Still, i fear this does not address the problem of a Constitutionally-, historically-, and biblically-ignorant and non-participating electorate habitually placing corrupt people in office. We are in moral and spiritual decline.
Hoping for revival, but none is guaranteed.
You are absolutely right about that! The way things are going, it's a sure bet that one or two more presidential election cycles will pretty much erase any real constitutional conservative from the federal government... unless we do something... and I'm thinking that this Convention of States might be just the thing.
I know there are folks out there who say that we just have to vote for the good guys and eventually things will turn around. Well, I don't know about you, but I've kinda been doing that for over 40 years, and as far as I can see, that ain't working out so well
Frankly, the prospect of an amendment imposing lifetime term limits on all federal officials is the primary reason that I support this movement. Since the Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom ruled that the voters of a sovereign state don’t have the right to impose term limits on their own locally-elected federal delegation, I can see no other way for us ever to bring an end to the modern-day phenomenon of the “Career Politician,” including those who wear black robes to work.
Resolving that one issue, I believe, would go a very long way toward eliminating many of the most pressing issues that we face. Washington, DC, without a doubt, has become the most powerful city in the world, and no one who enters its enormous sphere of influence can help but be changed by it... and usually not for the better.
Anyway, I'll give you this link to a previous post I made here, just in case you missed it. If you're interested, it's a discussion of reasons why no one should fear a Convention of States. What we should fear is what will happen to the country if we do nothing.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3136226/posts?page=3#3
Thank you so much for sharing this with us, dear The Bat Lady!
Unfortunately, people seem to believe that one tea party victory (Ted Cruz) means the 17th amendment shouldn’t be repealed. The fact that most state legislatures are republican and would probably result in a republican majority in the senate seems to fall on deaf ears.
////////
I agree with you that the 17th should be repealed. Not sure why the folks at your convention voted it down.
Currently, Senate seats are for the most part available to the highest bidder. If you can raise $100M, or so, you can usually win. This generally limits access to the Senate to the very rich. (Yes: There are exceptions (see Ted Cruz), but they are just that ... exceptions.)
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.