Understood. But they do pretty much exactly what they want, ignoring the Constitution you want to amend. My concern is more about the First and Second Amendments that they’re already ignoring.
I’ve also seen analyses that indicate once a convention is called, what’s to keep the states from sending delegates who want to do more than just consider new amendments? What’s to keep them from voting on whether to repeal the First Amendment and/or the Second Amendment? Nothing.
The bottom line is things are already bad enough, and given the demographics of our nation nowadays, I have zero faith that the convention will be comprised of just patriots. A runaway convention would be an unmitigated disaster. The Left’s wet dream.
I mean, there’s a reason that scumbag Soros thinks this is a great idea.
State law, backed up with felony penalties for violating their commissions.
What ever amendments were proposed by an Article V Convention of States would still have to be ratified by 38 states.
Do you seriously believe that 38 states would vote to repeal the 1st or 2nd amendment?
Article V convention called...
States send delegates... delegates debate and propose amendments... CONVENTION votes on amendments to send to states...
38 states to ratify...
It’s quite possible that NO offending amendments would even make it out of the Convention...
So TRUE BLUE states can send their delegations. Fantastic. They can be part of the debate and propose whatever they want... convention won’t allow it out... AND IF IT DOES< still need 38 states to ratify...
And delegates will be under STATE LAWS to govern their behaviors...
Let's talk about what a "runaway convention" really is.
1. Is it a convention that attempts to write a brand new Constitution, such as when the Articles of Confederation were replaced with our current Constitution?
This cannot happen. It is not 1787, and there already is a Constitution in force. The only output of the convention would be proposed amendments.
2. Is it a convention where all sorts of odd amendments are proposed?
Perhaps. More likely, the result would be that an oddball delegation from a state that was sent with instructions to disrupt would be ejected by the rest of the body. Any amendment proposals would have to be voted on, and it would be unfortunate if some really odd proposed amendments actually passed the convention. Then, they would still need 38 states to ratify an oddball amendment.
3. Is it a convention with such an arcane set of parliamentary rules that nothing ever gets voted on, essentially turning the convention into one large filibuster?
Would some states try to bog down the process so that nothing ever comes of it, and the convention degenerates into a waste of time to the point where the states recall their delegations and give up? I would hope that the states have enough people with high motives that they would send responsible, good-faith actors to such an historic event.
-PJ
Too many people want to open up a Pandora’s Box With a Constitutional Comvention. Some of these people who want to do so are being duped by Liberals, Leftists, Marxists and Democrats - who would love to get the chance of rewriting the US Constitution. These liberals and Marxists would love to get a hold of those Bill of Rights and “set it straight” for our modern world, because the Founding Fathers are outdated in our present world.