[NTHockey]

Additional concerns about an Article V Convention:
1. Congress calls the Convention, not the states. So, even if 34 states call for an Article V Convention, Congress is under no compulsion to accede.
2. Rereading Article V, it APPEARS that amendments are approved by the delegates, not brought back to the state legislatures. Probably a better mechanism.

I would add one rule. No delegate (commissioner) may be a state employee nor hold any elected or appointed office.

[Da Bilge Troll]

"Congress is under no compulsion to accede"

Yes it is. Note the use of the word "shall":

From Article V: "...on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention..."

[betty boop]

1. Congress calls the Convention, not the states. So, even if 34 states call for an Article V Convention, Congress is under no compulsion to accede.

You are leaving out the practical point of what is needed to invoke a constitutionally valid Congressional CALL — which, under Article V, is mandatory upon the due Applications of 34 States.

So, we have a 34-state criterion that has to be met, before Congress is mandated to act. What is that criterion?

It seems there are two ways to look at this problem.

The first is to say that, once 34 states have applied for an Article V COS on any subject matter whatsoever, that Congress must call the COS.

By that criterion, Congress would have been constitutionally compelled to call a COS back in the 1970s, there having been 34 State applications by that time.

The question then becomes, does Congress have a duty to respect a simple numerical tally of States making Applications — a simple arithmetic, mathematically linear tally of States — "1 + 1 + 1 ... + 1, + 1, + 1," until you get to = 34?

Or is it reasonable for Congress to "aggregate" State Applications by a reasonably-close-subject-matter criterion, which goes beyond simple arithmetic? Just as human life, and the American polity, are not reducible to simple arithmetic?

Anyhoot, the above seems to be the root of the main dispute here at FR about the Article V COS, which I desperately desire to see CALLED. Having said that, I hold to the latter view of the matter, for the reasons given here, and in other recent posts.

I agree with your observation and conclusion at (2): State conventions are not directly accountable to State legislatures.

And certainly, I DO agree with you that "No delegate (commissioner) may be a state employee nor hold any elected or appointed office."

Thank you so much for writing, NTHockey!