Georgia Votes for Convention of States to Amend Constitution

From the Convention of States website in italics with some of my comments (bolding and underlining is mine also):

“A Convention of States can propose amendments if 2/3 of states submit applications for such a convention. These applications must all deal with the same issue (i.e., limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government)

“Article V gives states the power to call a convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution.

“By calling a convention of the states, we can stop the federal spending and debt spree, the power grabs of the federal courts, and other misuses of federal power. The current situation is precisely what the Founders feared, and they gave us a solution we have a duty to use.

“After the states propose, debate, and vote upon the proposed amendments, they will be sent to the 50 state legislatures for ratification. Three-quarters of the states must agree for any of the proposed amendments to be ratified.

“Congress has no authority to stop such a process.

“Rather than calling a convention for a specific amendment, Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG) has launched the Convention of the States Project to urge state legislatures to properly use Article V to call a convention for a particular subject—reducing the power of Washington, D.C. It is important to note that a convention for an individual amendment (e.g. a Balanced Budget Amendment) would be limited to that single idea. Requiring a balanced budget is a great idea that CSG fully supports. Congress, however, could comply with a Balanced Budget Amendment by simply raising taxes.

“The following are examples of amendment topics that could be discussed at a convention of states:

• A balanced budget amendment
Careful here. Must be carefully written to say that raising taxes above the prescribed % (should be flat, around 15% of income) is forbidden to balance the budget. Note: the deficit is not a big economic problem - TAXES ARE. Politicians generally have and always will spend more than they take in but only up to a point above the revenue rate. The BEST way to haul in spending is CUT TAXES to a FLAT RATE of about 15%.
• A redefinition of the General Welfare Clause (the original view was the federal government could not spend money on any topic within the jurisdiction of the states)
• A redefinition of the Commerce Clause (the original view was that Congress was granted a narrow and exclusive power to regulate shipments across state lines--not all the economic activity of the nation)
• A prohibition of using international treaties and law to govern the domestic law of the United States.
Nipping Agenda 21 and Obama's Agenda 21 Executive Orders in the bud.
• A limitation on using Executive Orders and federal regulations to enact laws (since Congress is supposed to be the exclusive agency to enact laws).
Nipping the Administrative State in the bud. The unconstitutional, unaccountable, unelected, Administrative State needs to be abolished.
• Imposing term limits on Congress and the Supreme Court.
For Congress, the bad news is this would limit the freedom of people to choose their representatives. The good news of course would be to oust demagogues and power mongers but if the voters would have reelected them what's to keep them for reelecting another crop of the same? Better is to tie their hands with these amendments and let the people decide who they want to elect. For SCOTUS, probably should be an option by a sitting POTUS to reassign a Justice if he chooses.
• Placing an upper limit on federal taxation.
Should be a simple flat tax of around 15% of income. The lawyers and tax industry will howl. Let 'em howl. They're as bad or worse than the politicians. This will be the biggest fight becasue it is the heart of the matter: BIG GOVERNMENT SELF INTEREST. Yes, the same self-interested $4 TRILLION BIG GOVERNMENT that teaches that only private industry has greed and self interest. Shove it back in their face.
• Requiring the sunset of all existing federal taxes and a super-majority vote to replace them with new, fairer taxes

“The leadership of the COS Project believes the success of a convention of states depends to a large extent on the American citizens. Our plan is as follows:

1. We seek to have a viable political operation that is active in a minimum of 40 states.
2. Our goal is to have local leaders--District Captains--in at least 75% of the districts in these states.
3. District captains will organize at least 100 people in each of these districts to contact their legislator to support a convention of the states, and turn out at least 25 people per district at legislative hearings.”

God bless America and may we succeed in this.

IBSSIACC (in before somebody says it's a con-con)

Maybe that will inoculate this thread from that happening, we'll see.

Link to COS:

The Federal Government is broken. Washington D.C. will never voluntarily relinquish its power. Left unchecked, the government will continue to bankrupt this nation and destroy the liberty of the people. It is time for citizens and the States to act and we have the solution.

Article V ping.

Bravo!

Mark Levin has stated his view that it will require some sort of national emergency for the Article V movement to find success. I hope he is wrong but I am convinced that without an Article V solution the country is destined for something worse than an emergency.

posted over two weeks ago....

Couldn’t find it but it would help if you included the link.

Thanks. Can’t imagine Free Republic not being completely behind this effort.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3130401/posts

Requiring the sunset of all existing federal taxes and a super-majority vote to replace them with new, fairer taxes

I like it, but they need to be far more clear on "fairer" due to liberals and their, ever-evolving definition of words.

We are at the point of oppression. When and where will the next Lexington and Concord happen this go-round?

A lot of initial negative reaction on that thread not realizing it is a convention of states limited to ONE SUBJECT: cutting big government. Random amendments are off the table. Hope people begin to understand this a little better.

“Thanks. Can’t imagine Free Republic not being completely behind this effort.”

With the political, and moral environment that we have today then any modifications would turn out to be extremely liberal, and trash the basic ideas of the constitution. So this would be in effect to opening of a Pandora’s box.

Here's my usual pedantic boilerplate for these threads.

***

The amendatory process under Article V consists of three steps: Proposal, Disposal, and Ratification.

Proposal:

There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.

The Congressional Method requires the House and Senate to pass an amendment by a two-thirds majority.
The Amendments Convention Method requires the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to petition Congress to call a Convention for Proposing Amendments. The states may request a single-subject convention or a general convention open to all subjects. Once the two-thirds threshold is reached, Congress is required to set a time and place for the convention.

Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.

Disposal:

Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:

State Legislature Method, or the
State Ratifying Convention Method.

The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.

Ratification:

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.

Forbidden Subjects:

Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.

Explicitly forbidden:

No amendment may be added to the Constitution concerning slavery or capitation taxes until 1808. We’re past that deadline.
No amendment may be added to the Constitution to change the principle of equal representation in the Senate. So if California wants five senators, every state must have five senators. To permit this principle to be violated, this provision in Article V would first have to be amended; it would be a two-step process.

Implicitly forbidden:

The Constitution of 1787 may not be abrogated and replaced with a new document. Article V only authorizes “a convention for proposing amendments to this Constitution”; therefore, the Constitution of 1787 is locked in place forever. Congress and an Amendments Convention have exactly the same Proposal power; therefore, neither Congress nor an Amendments Convention can start over. Both bodies can only propose amendments. To permit the drafting of a new constitution, this provision in Article V would first have to be repealed; it would be a two-step process.

I have two reference works for those interested.

The first is from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative pro-business group. This document has been sent to every state legislator in the country.

Proposing Constitutional Amendments by a Convention of the States: A Handbook for State Lawmakers

The second is a 1973 report from the American Bar Association attempting to identify gray areas in the amendatory process to include an Amendments Convention. It represents the view of the ruling class of 40 years ago. While I dislike some of their conclusions, they have laid out the precedents that may justify those conclusions. What I respect is the comprehensive job they did in locating all the gray areas. They went so far as to identify a gray area that didn't pop up until the Equal Rights Amendment crashed and burned a decade later. Even if you find yourself in disagreement with their vision, it's worth reading to see the view of the ruling class toward the process.

Report of the ABA Special Constitutional Convention Study Committee

Thanks for the ping.

The president rewrites/amends/ignores laws as he pleases. Under His direction, governmental agencies stomp on political opponents.

I hope this benign and constitutional approach in Article V takes hold of the national mood before less-than-peaceful means enter the minds of men with nothing to lose.

Well, as I see it, this is a Convention of States limited to only one subject matter: cutting federal government size and power. They will entertain no other subject.

That being the premise, it's pretty certain 2/3's of the states wouldn't put up with a rogue adventure by some wackos. This looks legit.

Best thing I see coming down the pike. Our greatest threat by far is the federal government who already ignores the Constitution. Time for the states to put a dunce hat on the feds and put them back into their corner where they belong.

Hey Publius, add me to your Article V ping list. We miss you up here in Washington State.

Good for Georgia....

Added! I’ll be leaving Georgia in May for either Texas or Spokane, so I may be back.

Article V ping.

Good luck to you, let us know where you end up!

A Constitutional c onvention is a HORRIBLE idea....with liberalism as rampant as it is in this country, can you imagine what damage they would cause if they could modify the Constitution????? A horrible thought...at best.