Free Republic

In the latter half of 1788 the man whom history praised as the “Father of the Constitution” opposed an Article V general convention of the states. Recall from last week’s squib the various state demands for a convention after the establishment of the first Constitutional congress. While few were entirely comfortable with the draft Constitution of September 17th 1787, Federalists in several states won over enough Anti-Federalists once they felt confident the new government would call an Article V convention to sort out the various amendments recommended by most of the eleven state ratifying conventions. Although to all outward appearances...

Among the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation was the near impossibility of amending them to meet pressing needs regarding taxation and commerce. In 1787-1788, the lower threshold to amend the Constitution per Article V overcame Anti-Federalist reluctance to form a new Union. From the time the federal convention sent the draft Constitution to the Confederation Congress and states, many Anti-Federalists demanded a second convention, preferably before federal elections and the establishment of a new government. Not only the Anti-Federalists, but very few Federalists were entirely satisfied with the Constitution as written. The difference was that Federalists were satisfied that...

James Madison and Federalist supporters of the Constitution carried the day in the Confederation Congress. Although Congress did not express explicit support, it sent the Constitution anyway to the states for submission to ratifying conventions. Most notably, Congress did not attach the amendments recommended by Virginia’s Richard Henry Lee. To Lee, amending the Constitution before ratification made simple sense. Just a few preventive amendments may mean the difference between a republic and an aristocracy likely to slide into oligarchy. So, as the Anti-Federalist forces gathered, the nationwide question remained: Should an imperfect Constitution be amended before the ratification of nine...

Subtitle: When to Amend? Congress, that poor substitute for an actual government, was on the verge of collapse in 1787. Not a single state complied with the tax requisition of 1786. When the Federal Convention in Philadelphia adjourned on September 17th, the prospects of adequate tax collections for 1787 were equally dim. James Madison wrote, “The Treasury Board seems to be in despair of maintaining the shadow of government much longer. Without money, the offices must be shut up, and the handful of troops on the frontier disbanded.” Nothing but the hope of better things inspired by the convention did...

To the extent that the world’s once most deliberative institution performs its duty at all, the US Senate is reactive rather than deliberative. It reacts to crises of the moment such as school/church shootings and short-term continuing spending resolutions. Unless your Congressman or senator is Ryan, Pelosi, McConnell or Schumer, it’s unlikely your representative or senator had a say in one of Congress' most important duties: appropriations. The bill was presented to the rank and file Congress on a Wednesday, which gave them scant time to read the ginormous thing before voting on Friday. This insult to the sovereign people...

Article V opponents argue that society is too corrupt to trust to a Convention of States. Aren’t the signs all around? School shootings, fatherless homes, muslim no-go zones, barbaric gang killings, government-sponsored abortion and sale of body parts, creeping proscription of Christianity, coarse manners, illiterate high school graduates, all point to an untrustworthy culture in decline. Not only is the decay evident across the whole of society, but thanks to decades of open borders society itself is fracturing into pieces, pieces of self-serving groups intent on beggaring every other group for government goodies. To Article V opponents, societal corruption begins...

Must revolution be violent? Must men meet on the battlefield to affect change? Must revolution upend an older society and replace it with a new one? Wouldn’t a 21st century restoration of free American government without resort to violence be revolutionary? Pennsylvania’s Framer James Wilson thought so: This revolution principle--that, the sovereign power residing in the people, they may change their constitution and government whenever they please--is not a principle of discord, rancor, or war: it is a principle of melioration, contentment, and peace. It is a principle not recommended merely by a flattering theory: it is a principle recommended...

Many threads here on FreeRepublic use one of the images I've made in support of a Convention Of States (COS). I'm reaching out to the mass mind here for any ideas Freepers have for pro-Article V graphics. Better yet would be to post some graphics of your own. If you are part of the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) crowd please post somewhere else. I'm 100% behind the COS and you have little to zero chance of changing my mind.

What do the John Birch Society, Eagle Forum, Common Cause and Planned Parenthood have in common? They all oppose the states’ use of Article V of our Constitution to impose and enforce constitutional limits on Washington. While it is no surprise that Marxist-leaning groups would fight, tooth and nail, to resist any plan for breaking the federal government’s virtual monopoly on policy-making, all conservatives agree that this monopoly is a perversion of our federal system. But, sadly, the Left’s propaganda and junk history have brainwashed some conservatives into opposing the states’ use of constitutional power to check federal overreach. Having...

Subtitle: Progressives Blow Up the Framers’ Constitution. Despite the lessons of history, Progressives promote ever more democracy, which, unless tempered and limited, is like turning one’s household over to the majority rule of teenagers. Is this household arrangement fair? Sure. It is also idiocy which no parent would consider. A senate of the states, and not the parchment barriers of the Constitution stood athwart democratic rule by social justice emotions little different from that of the typical teenager.What was the 17th Amendment (17A) supposed to do? The post-17A senate was to respond to the people’s needs, and free the senate...

As John Locke related in his Two Treatises of Government, the legislative power is the essence of republicanism. Despite the lessons of the great Enlightenment philosophers and the Framers’ long experience in colonial and free republican affairs, they experienced much difficulty in designing a suitable, stable, effective legislature for a young and growing society. 1 Yesterday’s grand committee met to address the basis of representation in the legislature. What compromise could overcome large state objections to parity among the states in the senate? Recall that large states feared small state dominance over taxation, and that the small would disproportionately burden...

Subtitle: Gouverneur Morris Warns of a Uniparty. The convention slogged on as the large/small state standoff continued over the question of representation in the senate. I will follow a different course today and let a little-known Framer, Pennsylvania’s Gouverneur Morris take center stage. We can thank Morris for the precise text and prose of our Constitution. As chairman of the Committee of Style, he not only smoothed and connected resolutions, he occasionally inserted clauses on his own initiative, which the convention typically accepted as written. Where history tagged James Madison as the father of the Constitution, Morris was its acknowledged...

In fits and starts, often one step forward and two steps back, the convention slowly shaped the pieces to its constitutional jigsaw puzzle. Incredibly, as a few delegates seemingly wished to flip the table over and scatter the pieces, enough of the remaining delegates stood fast to grind out our beloved Constitution. On June 27th, rather than address the question of congressional powers in Resolution 6, the convention mired once again in the nature of representation, Resolutions 7 & 8. On the question of an equitable ratio in the House of Representatives: From Madison’s notes, Luther Martin (MD), the State...

June 14. William Patterson (NJ), spooked by the developing Virginia Plan, asked for a one-day adjournment to work on an improved federal design. June 15. He submitted the New Jersey/Patterson Plan. The Committee of the Whole will take up the amended Virginia and New Jersey Plans tomorrow. June 16. Since I previously blogged my observations of the New Jersey Plan here, I intended to overlook the proceedings of June 16th. However, the day had an impact on the issue of proportional v. equal representation of the states in the senate and is therefore worth a look. John Lansing (NY) and...

As of June 12th, the evolving senate still had no powers beyond those of the Confederation. Additional powers arrived after delegates determined its institutional shape and characteristics. At issue was the senate’s relationship with the lower house and the executive branch. Governor Randolph reminded the committee “the democratic licentiousness of the state legislatures proved the necessity of a firm senate.” The best model was the senate of Maryland, which consisted of fifteen members appointed to five-year terms by an electoral college of two electors from each county and one each from the cities of Baltimore and Annapolis. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_Senate] Yet, even...

In this series I will relate the debates at the Federal Convention surrounding the structure and responsibilities of the US Senate. We’ll find that the Framers assigned the new government its functions, beyond those of the Confederation Congress, after the convention determined the mode of senatorial elections and the number of senators per state. Like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle, the structure and powers of the various pieces of government shaped, and were shaped by, the checks and balances between the three branches and the states. The shape of each piece influenced the shape of adjacent pieces. The pulling of...

I’ve found the State Legislators Article V Caucus website to be an invaluable resource for keeping up with the latest goings-on in the Article V Convention of States movement. Anyone can join. Members receive a monthly email with links to timely articles on the progress of Article V across the states. Features from the October issue: • Phoenix Convention September 12th – 15th. Nineteen states sent delegates to develop parliamentary rules for a future Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) Article V COS. View the rules package here. • Phoenix Convention Drew Considerable Media Attention. US News & World Report and the...

THE I’s had been dotted; the T’s were crossed. The 55 delegates to America’s first and so-far-only constitutional convention had hammered out compromises on the separation of powers, apportionment of seats in the legislature and the future of the slave trade. But on September 15th 1787 George Mason, a plantation owner from Virginia, rose to his feet to object. Article V of the draft text laid out two paths by which future amendments could be proposed. Congress could either propose them itself, or it could summon a convention of representatives from the states to propose them. Mason warned that if...

Subtitle: The 15th Amendment. Recall from Parts I & II, and Article I § 2 of the Constitution, the states determine voter qualifications to the US Congress. From Parts III & IV, we saw that the late 1860s Congress differentiated between civil and political rights, and Congress did not regard the franchise as a civil right. Section 2 of the 14th Amendment prescribed the punishment for state discrimination against voting based on race. As opposed to civil rights, which everyone in America (citizen and non-citizen) has from the moment of conception, voting is a political right subject to Federal/State Constitutions...

In his remarks at the Henderson County public library, Mike Faulkenberry, state director of the N.C. Convention of States Project, asked a crowd of about 80 people whether they felt the federal government is “doing just a bang-up job.” None raised their hand to answer yes. He asked whether they felt the federal government gets carried away sometimes, but for the most part does pretty well in areas such as taxes and regulations, and again none answered yes. But when he asked who felt the federal government “is completely out of control,” hands went up across the room. The Convention...