Texas governor calls for constitutional convention

The Hill ^ | January 8, 2016 | Harper Neidig

[make no mistake]

Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Friday called for a constitutional convention of states to offer nine amendments in order to “restore the Rule of Law and return the Constitution to its intended purpose.”

“The increasingly frequent departures from Constitutional principles are destroying the Rule of Law foundation on which this country was built,” said Abbott in a statement.

“We are succumbing to the caprice of man that our Founders fought to escape. The cure to these problems will not come from Washington D.C. Instead, the states must lead the way.”

[E. Pluribus Unum]

An Article V Convention of States is not a constitutional convention.

[A CA Guy]

Amen.

[make no mistake]

I think Gov. Abbott is brilliant. I hope he continues his political influence even after his governorship.

[matthew fuller]

I agree, totally support him.

[SWAMP-C1PHER]

I hope this happens soon. As in under 10 years.

[make no mistake]

If it is not a constitutional convention, what would you call it?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

http://www.conventionofstates.com/faq

A convention of states is a convention called by the state legislatures for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. They are given power to do this under Article V of the Constitution. It is not a constitutional convention. It cannot throw out the Constitution because its authority is derived from the Constitution.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I just donated tonight.

http://www.conventionofstates.com/

[Ben Hecks]

Earlier thread with comments:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3381366/posts

[Rusty0604]

Where is he throwing out the constitution? Looks like he is just trying to bring back the constitution.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

This is very big and may realistically be the last chance we have of saving our republic.

My FRiends, it is critical that we understand this concept that our brilliant Founding Fathers provided for us to escape the Leviathan State.

It is critical that we be very highly educated on it so that we can explain why it is good, why it is not a “constitutional convention” (which we must never, EVER allow), and that it will ultimately free the states from federal tyranny.

Get Mark Levin’s, “The Liberty Amendments” and study it in depth.

[make no mistake]

I’m sorry. I did look and did not see it.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

He incorrectly called it a constitutional convention when what he is proposing is an Article V convention. Dwight Eisenhower was for it. Milton Friedman was too.

[be-baw]

If there were a convention of the states, how could you be confident that it wouldn’t be corrupted? I like the notion, and it would make sense if we could trust the people who would get involved, but I don’t

[Ben Hecks]

Hope I didn’t give the impression that I was trying out for the post police. Many may have missed the earlier post.

[Brass Lamp]

A convention of states is a convention called by the state legislatures for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. They are given power to do this under Article V of the Constitution. It is not a constitutional convention. It cannot throw out the Constitution because its authority is derived from the Constitution.

Which is, of course, why we continue to operate under the Articles of Confederation to this very day!

[X-spurt]

I can’t read his mind, but Abbott has continued to reinforce his anti-corrupt, patriotic, promise keeping common sense politician reputation.

If there is anyone at his level we can trust, it is Abbott.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Because it’s not a constitutional convention. The states agree what the proposals are before they convene. Thirteen states can stop any proposal.

If you’re actually interested, Mark Levin wrote The Liberty Amendments to explain everything.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Liberty-Amendments-Mark-Levin/dp/145160632X

[Publius]

Article V ping. The fifth time this information had been posted.