Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State-Led Push to Force Constitutional Convention Gains Steam With High-Profile Republican Support
Fox News ^ | 14 February 2015

Posted on 02/14/2015 11:21:12 AM PST by Publius

A state-level campaign to rein in the federal government by calling an unprecedented convention to amend the U.S. Constitution is gaining steam, picking up support from two high-profile Republicans as more states explore the idea.

Coburn, a legendary government-waste watchdog, announced this week that he has joined the effort by becoming a senior adviser for the group Convention of States Action, which wants states, not just Congress, to pass constitutional amendments.

Article V of the Constitution states amendments can be ratified either by Congress or by states if two-thirds of them petition Congress to call a convention. Then, any amendment proposed at the convention must be ratified by three-fourth, or 38, states.

So far, the Alaska, Florida and Georgia legislatures have each passed a resolution in support of a convention, and 25 more are considering one, according to group.

“Our founders anticipated the federal government might get out of control,” Coburn said Tuesday. “And they gave us a constitutional mechanism to rein it in.”

Meanwhile, Ohio GOP Gov. John Kasich, a potential 2016 White House candidate, has recently concluded a six-state tour in which he has asked legislators to support the convention, largely to push the balanced budget idea.

“Who the heck thinks we should keep spending without any regard to the consequences?” Kasich, a fiscal hawk and former House Budget Committee chairman, asked in South Dakota. “I don’t care if you’re a Republican, a Democrat or a Martian. This is not what we should be doing as a nation. It’s irresponsible.”

Kasich, who claims credit for crafting a balanced federal budget before leaving Congress in 2000, gave a similar pitch week last month in Utah, urging state lawmakers to pass a convention resolution, which has failed there in past years.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Alaska; US: Florida; US: Georgia; US: Ohio; US: South Dakota; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: alaska; amendmentsconvention; articlev; florida; georgia; johnkasich; ohio; southdakota; utah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-216 next last
To: Publius
This is entirely correct.

" I could see 4 or 5 proposed amendments being reported to Congress by the convention. Congress would then decide which method the states would use to ratify for each individual amendment."

101 posted on 02/14/2015 5:26:01 PM PST by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

I respectfully disagree. Rather than suicide it will be a rebirth of freedom. Government of the people. And by the people. The ratification requirements alone would prevent any CoS from causing serious mischief should marxists try and take over.


102 posted on 02/14/2015 5:33:51 PM PST by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sasparilla
It depends on your definition of force. Financial and economic coercion at that level are brutally effective. Ask Canadians what they think will happen if the US closes its border with Canada. Then ask Americans the same question.

Orders of magnitude make a difference.

If 3/4 of the states, with 2/3 of the country's population, somehow ratify a pretty much new Constitution, the remainder of the states would have effectively no way to oppose. The chance of that happening is pretty much nil.

"The only way a new Constitution would come about would be after tossing the entire government and starting over from scratch. That would have to be done by force."

103 posted on 02/14/2015 5:35:15 PM PST by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

It is good then that the CoS is not a General Constitutional Convention. Rather under Article V it is simply another way to propose amendments to the constitution and then have those amendments forwarded to the stTes for ratification.


104 posted on 02/14/2015 5:39:52 PM PST by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jonno

You can BET they will add an amendment to do with climate change, and the pubs will go along with it.


105 posted on 02/14/2015 5:44:17 PM PST by esoxmagnum (Turtles don't win fights. Victory belongs to the aggressor, not the guy hiding in a bunker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; jonno
I don't see anything right with the people who will decide how this convention proceeds.

From the Constitution, this is all it says, and notice that the CURRENT CONGRESS at the time of the convention controls the process throughout:

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;

Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.


106 posted on 02/14/2015 5:53:59 PM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Thud
The 3/4 rule was selected to make it very unlikely that the states will ratify ANY amendment originating from a new constitutional convention, regardless of who thinks the amendments are good or bad.

Indeed; you know that, and I know that, but these Oh Noes! The Constitution will be completely open! doomsayers obviously don't.

107 posted on 02/14/2015 6:10:53 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
In looking at the last few amendments, going back to the middle of the last century, I can’t see anything real fundamental that has changed with the U.S. Constitution. If the Constitution hasn’t gone through any radical changes in the last 65 years or so, then where are these problems we’re having right now coming from?

the 17th Amendment [08 April 1913] fundamentally changed the Union; before senators were representatives of the States — afterwards they became a sort of super-Representative.

I think our present U.S. Constitution is just fine, actually.

I think there are things that really do need addressed:
(1) Taxation — namely it should be uniform with no deductions, credits, write-offs, or exemptions; also, withholdings should be utterly barred.
(2) The ability to accumulate debt (and impose on the States non-funded obligations) should be restricted.

I have amendments addressing these issues, and a few others, here.

108 posted on 02/14/2015 6:17:54 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
Sorry, that was a link to a joke brochure; the real link is this.
(That's what I get for not clearing out my clipboard's cut-n-paste.)
109 posted on 02/14/2015 6:20:55 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

THAT is my fear, trading our Rights for their agenda.


110 posted on 02/14/2015 7:13:02 PM PST by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

Nope. You need to understand the difference between a Constitutional Convention and an Article V Convention of the states. Big difference.

Publius links are a good place to start. Mark Levin’s book “The Liberty Amendments” is another. I confess I did not understand the difference either and at first had the same fears as you. Once I educated myself about Article V I realized how wrong I was and that indeed our founders left us an option to restore the Republic.

You are doing yourself a disservice if you don’t do some research first before reaching a conclusion about it.


111 posted on 02/14/2015 7:13:20 PM PST by conservativegranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots

The morons that came up with this stupid idea were our founders. What you are talking about is a Constitutional Convention which is NOT a Convention of the States.

The Congress will have nothing to do with this. The states would be appointing delegates.

The morons in the Congress already have the means to amend our Constitution. Article V allows for the states to also amend the Constitution and they cannot do so without a large majority in agreement.


112 posted on 02/14/2015 7:19:48 PM PST by conservativegranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Have you read any of Publius’ posts? They would have nothing to do with it. The delegates are appointed by the states and the Convention is run by the STATES.


113 posted on 02/14/2015 7:25:09 PM PST by conservativegranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

ST this is a specious argument. The old constitution is for a moral and just people. The objective of an amended constitution is to provide legal means to combat a corrupt and I dare say criminal political class. Presently we have a criminal federal court system, a criminal executive, and a congress with enough criminals in it to protect and defend the other two criminal branches. All aided by a propaganda media that deceives and manipulates the public. And your argument appears to be that the present constitution is OK as. The activites of the federal government refutes your argument in in its entirety. You are worried about the imposition of tyranny, sorry, it is already here. We need to use every means available to restore a moral and just government and responsibly exercise every peaceful means to do so. Article V is that means and it is the only chance this republic has. In the end it will be used.


114 posted on 02/14/2015 7:36:20 PM PST by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: conservativegranny

I stand by my opinion that I do not want them messing with the Constitution at this time. Re; democrat convention, denounced God. Further, most of our present politicians were elected by Grubers’s people.


115 posted on 02/14/2015 7:43:12 PM PST by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

Post #66, please. You are hinting that Americans are no longer capable of self-government.


116 posted on 02/14/2015 7:44:45 PM PST by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

The Constitution has already “been messed” with. It is essentially null and void right now. We have nothing left to lose.

How do you propose this problem is to be fixed?


117 posted on 02/14/2015 7:49:14 PM PST by conservativegranny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Publius

Who is the president?
Who is the governor of Oregon?


118 posted on 02/14/2015 7:53:20 PM PST by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heart

If you are saying that Americans are no longer capable of self-government, what is your solution? I listed the three I could think of. What are yours?


119 posted on 02/14/2015 7:54:40 PM PST by Publius ("Who is John Galt?" by Billthedrill and Publius now available at Amazon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: conservativegranny

If the three branches of government are not following the Constitution, should the same mindset change the Constitution?


120 posted on 02/14/2015 7:55:48 PM PST by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-216 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson