Be careful what you ask for. I think a convention will not work out like you think.
This is typical libertarian shallow thinking. How do you think this is going to work out?
Apparently, such a convention would have a pretty free hand in rewriting just about any clause in the US Constitution, or any of its amendments. Or the whole constitution, for that matter.
But what a commotion it would create.
There is no rewrite! It’s a method of proposing amendments that bypasses Congress. This method is in the Constitution! (Does anyone actually read the Constitution?), From the Constitution - its article five that’s the article between four and six!
“....
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.
.......”
Notice this part ...
“”...
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,
....”
It’s perfectly valid means of proposing amendments, no more dangerous than letting Congress do it. Which was what was done in the past!
The procedure for ratification is the same as if Congress proposed the amendments.
“...
ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States....”
3/4’s of the states means 3/4 * 50 = 37.5 rounding up 38 states needed to ratify each amendment. Again, no different than what was done in the past.
There is NO way I would trust our parasitic worthless pieces of $hit republicans to even follow the Constitution NOW as it is written. Bad Idea. there is only one way out of this mess......
Absolutely. Exactly. Dangerous ground. Not a good idea.
“Be careful what you ask for. I think a convention will not work out like you think.”
Nonsense. An Article V convention is for proposing new Constitutional amendments that then would go directly to the states for ratification by 2/3 of the state’s legislatures.
It is NOT a “Constitutional Convention” that would draft an entirely new constitution. That’s just propaganda from the statists who are afraid of the people taking back control of the Republic.
I hope you realize that An article 5 convention of states is DIFFERENT than a federal constitutional convention.
This is controlled by STATES. Each state gets equal say. There are far more GOP controlled states than demo-controlled states.
This is why liberals keep warning us that they would get everything they wanted- if that was true they would be screaming for it.
They WOULD get everything they wanted in a Constitutional Convention, which is the type Rush always warned about. But not in a Conventions of states.
The convention of states is a big F U to the federal government and is the best way to rid ourselves of federal overstepping.
One wonders… How could we be any further away from the constitutional republic as founded?
The Framers in their wisdom gave us the ability to fix what they saw was the inevitable establishment of a tyrannical federal authority. But you in your wisdom have decided that we should just stick with an overbearing deep state/federal government out of control.
my fear is that the chaos being created is on purpose. so, the powerful can use a convention of states to rewrite everything to their benefit.
Trying to read this author is like trying to listen to Michael Savage; you know there’s some interesting information there, but the presentation is so annoying you just want to slap the twit spouting off.
People who know what they are talking about don’t need to use hyperbole, insult, and drama-queen language.
And regardless of what this hyperventilating author says, we are well advised to be wary of a convention; it might be the saving or our republic, it might get hijacked to become the death of it. We *could* conceivably get rid of the 16th and 17th, rewrite the 2nd to be utterly unambigious as to constitutional carry and being able to own and carry nearly everything, and slap a line-item and balanced budget amendment in there, but then you still have to get 3/4 of the states to ratify it, good luck with that.
We don’t need to rewrite the Constitution, It simply needs to be followed.
The reason everything is so screwed up is because the left ignores the Constitution and the conservatives ignore it as well, in large part by not holding the libs to account when they violate it.
I think a rewrite of the constitution would make matters worse. Like when you want to make something mechanical run better and you tweak it here and there and then it breaks completely. That’s what were in for.
The problem is that people in office don't follow it.
That gives me little hope that those same people would follow a rewritten version, and that version would just mean new angles for those Hell-bent on circumventing it.
Fifty years ago, perhaps, when we had scholars who were not just parrots for one special interest or another, indoctrinated from K through University, perhaps then we could have rewritten parts of the Constitution with greater specificity to reduce the workarounds that have seriously damaged States Rights, but now? No.
Repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, and follow the rest.