Skip to comments.Alabama House calls for Convention of States to rein in federal government
Posted on 04/29/2015 4:16:46 PM PDT by cotton1706
MONTGOMERY, Ala. After several hours of debate Tuesday evening, the Alabama House of Representatives approved a resolution calling for a Convention of States to amend the U.S. Constitution.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution says that a convention of the states can be convened if two-thirds of the state legislatures (34) approve an application for the convention to occur.
By design, thats a high bar to clear. And the bar gets even higher when it comes to actually passing a constitutional amendment. It takes an affirmative vote from three-fourths (38) of the states to actually amend the constitution. Each state would only get one vote on proposed amendments.
The resolution passed today by the Alabama House strictly limits the purpose of the proposed convention to three areas:
1) imposing fiscal restraints on the federal government through a balanced budget amendment; 2) limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government; and 3) implementing term limits on federal elected officials.
This is the second year HJR112, sponsored by Rep. Ken Johnson (R-Moulton) and cosponsored by 52 additional Republicans, has been approved by the House. Last year the resolution died in the Senate, but Rep. Johnson has high hopes that this year will be the year Alabama officially signs on to the idea of a Article V convention.
Were calling for restraints on the federal government, Johnson told Yellowhammer when the resolution passed last year. That means an amendment that forces them to balance the budget and stops these overreaching federal mandates. Were also calling for term limits on federal elected offices.
(Excerpt) Read more at yellowhammernews.com ...
Maybe, but once convened, a new constitutional convention could result in the repeal of our existing one. Just adhere to the one we have, for goodness sake.
“Calling on restraints on the Federal government”. WTH does that even mean? So we cut Defense in half? Who decides? Balanced budget Amendment? Say buh bye to said military.
These Convention calls are all for the purpose of creating an entirely different America. There is nothing wrong with the Constitution. An Amendment here and there wouldn’t hurt perhaps and, of course, the document itself contains Article V. But anyone who thinks that somehow this is a Conservative dream event is SORELY mistaken.
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.
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.
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.
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.
Thank you for your enlightenment. I stand corrected. I still maintain that there is no NEED for a convention. The document, as written, provides all of the needed safeguards that we all desire. No one seems to want to enforce the Constitution, unfortunately,
They could then finish the job.
I'm not sure there are a sufficient number of true conservatives in congress to affect the right results.
The Amendments Convention represents the sovereignty of the whole people via their states, and that sovereignty supersedes that of Congress. Why? Because according to Madison, the Union and the Constitution were formed by the whole people via the states, and the Constitution created Congress. Congress did not create the Constitution.
If we could get past the senate president in AZ we could get it passed too.
To summarize from a previous post by GraceG:
1. Elect More Republicans - Failed due to RINO/Uni-party confluence.
2. Article V Convention of States to propose Amendments - Needed to try to take power from the federal government back to the states and reel in the federal leviathan.
3. State Nullification - Last ditch effort to try to take power back from the federal monster, though by this point it may be too late.
4. State Secession - Could either end up peaceably like the breakup of the Czechoslovakia in 1993 or a brutal:
5. Civil War II like the first one.... The longer we wait on #2, the more likely #3, then #4 and finally #5. .
So, do we do nothing and just wait for # 5?
Quick review: We need 34 states to pass an application, then Congress shall, by law, call a Convention of States as soon as it receives applications from 2/3 of the State Legislatures. That's 34 states. We now have 30 working on it. Amendments are proposed and voted on at the convention. Each Amendment must be ratified by ¾ of the states in order to become part of the US Constitution. Thats 38 states.
There are far more political and legal constraints on a runaway convention than on a runaway Congress. - Robert Natelson
Most FReepers are aware of these links, but I post anyway for review and for people new to Article V. It is our responsibility to make Article V the most understood aspect of the US Constitution.
****Please see this summary video from Alabama first: Convention of States - Alabama Way to go Alabama! A great introduction!
Convention of States Live! with Mike Farris
The Case for an Article V Convention. Great explanation of an Article V convention to the Massachusetts State Legislature.
**** Convention of States Lots of information here.
Call a Convention A call for a Convention of States
Article V Project to Restore Liberty Another good source.
A Summary of Mark Levins Proposed Amendments by Jacquerie
We can fight the uniparty! States, the Natural Second Party by Jacquerie
Congress Present Duty to Call a Convention:
Ulysses at the Mast: Democracy, Federalism, and the Sirens' Song of the Seventeenth Amendment by Jay Bybee. Repeal the 17th ! Shorter Abstract here: Ulysses at the Mast, one page Abstract
****For those of you that still have doubts about the Article V process, please review: Responses To Convention Of States Opposition My initial concerns were resolved after reading these articles. My attitude now is Go For It!
A Single-Subject Convention Addresses the runaway convention fear.
John Birch Society Denies Its History and Betrays Its Mission The original Birchers were for an Article V Convention.
Update: Convention of States by the numbers The current State count
Article V Handbook - for State Legislators An important resource.
**** State Legislators Article V Caucus State Legislators, Join up at this site!
Most State Legislatures are in session now. Send this list of links to your State Representatives and Senators here: Contact your State Legislators.
Excellent Article V Letter to a State Assemblyman by Jacquerie
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke.
Lets all work together to get this going!
Host on high the Bonnie Blue Flag that wears a single Star!
Seize the Nukes and threten to destroy Washington DC if they do not permit a peaceful seperation of the new CSA—The constitutional states of America. First president—Ted Cruz, VP Sarah Palin.
Sounds good to me.
Might be some merit to your argument.
On the other hand, the reason we are in the current position is because we have been too timid to take any sort of positive action. We are so good with the "what ifs" that we prefer the status quo (which is a continuing decline in our Freedoms due to Left-Wing activism, abetted by entrenched Dems) and it insures our eventual demise.
But can I use it for my ping list? Is that OK with you?
Certainly. The more the merrier.