Replies

> "But no one seems to have the stomach for this, these days.... "

You might have a blind spot in your peripheral view and it's not your fault nor anyone else with the same blind spot. Ted Cruz alluded to it, which is the fact that the Article V movement will grow if Congress and SCOTUS don't listen. Well, the fact is the Article V movement is already growing very rapidly at breakneck speed, but we don't hear about it much from the MSM presumably because they are Snobs and don't know yet how to handle a "radical" "fringe" movement by state legislators.

Her's the latest from the COS Project (http://www.conventionofstates.com/the_jefferson_statement )

But the Convention of States movement is achieving massive victories in the fight for liberty.

Just this year , we filed the Convention of States application in 34 state legislatures. Of those 34 states, 19 have passed initial committee votes already, after filing.

Additionally, 3 state Senate chambers and 8 House chambers have moved from Committee to passing the application via their respective floor votes thus far.

All of this progress builds on the valiant efforts of activists in Georgia, Alaska, Florida, and just recently Alabama who have all passed the COS application in both houses!

> "So, I believe you reach the just conclusion that what is needed is to reform, not only the Senate, but Congress as well. That sort of thing is resolved in the electoral process. That takes time; but time is what we seem to be running out of."

Indeed time is short. We need the states to exercise their Article V authority by carrying JUST ONE amendment across the finish line, then others may follow but the first one will be the game changer. The amendment they first get over the finish line must be designed so its administration and enforcement are solely in the hands of the States, not the Federal Government. The first completed Article V amendment should be "new", and both broad and specific, simple yet powerful, and drafted to address state powers that level the playing field between the States and the Federal Government. The amendment should be viewed as benign by the general populace and completely justified in their minds for States to have.

There are 7.398 state legislators. They can be viewed as a backup to the failed representational body that is presently Congress. These 7,398 legislators occupy 99 legislative chambers (Nebraska has only one chamber). Each state legislative chamber appoints one delegate to the Article V Meeting of States. It takes 66 delegates from 34 states to propose an Article V amendment. Only 66 people are needed. No governor, no federal agency or court or federal body of any kind can stop or interfere with the work of the 99 delegates sent to the meeting of the states. This group of state delegates would hold more constitutional power of authority than any other group in government. They remain beholden to their state legislatures and no one else.

Conservatives and republicans control 66 of 99 state chambers. Republicans in state legislatures are generally much closer to the people and are more conservative as a result.

...the Convention of States Project ["COS"] ... calls for an Article V Convention for "the sole purpose of proposing amendments 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."

Hostage, I am strongly sympathetic with the COS's goals as outlined here, on the understanding that proposed amendments would be for a balanced federal budget, term limits, and limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government. That last item is rather vague — what are the specific proposals for doing that?

A COS would be an historical first — no amendment to the Constitution has thus far been secured by that means. On my reading of Article V, a COS requires two-thirds of State legislatures to submit an "Application" to Congress for authorization to proceed; and then any proposed amendment must be submitted to State Conventions in three-fourths of the States in order to be ratified. What could go wrong there? What happens if you can't get three-fourths of the States to establish a convention? I have some skepticism that my home state would be willing to do this.

The writer of the article at the link you provided in your last wrote, "While some have expressed fears that a Convention of States might be misused or improperly controlled by Congress, it is our considered judgment that the checks and balances in the Constitution are more than sufficient to ensure the integrity of the process." Details please!!! If the checks and balances were actually working, then we wouldn't need a COS in the first place.

It sounds great, but "the devil's in the details."

Meanwhile, I would do all I can to urge my state legislature to be one of the 34 states necessary to convene the COS.

Hostage, I'd appreciate any further details you can provide re: the Article V Project. Thank you so very much for writing!