A Constitutional Convention is Needed

[jwoodie]

to reassert our founding principles of federalism, i.e., State sovereignty and limits on Federal authority. Over the years, these principles have been "temporarily" suspended due to exigent circumstances such as wars and Southern segregation. For example, the Federal Income Tax, which was first established to finance World War I (the war Wilson promised to keep us out of), turned out to be the fox that has almost destroyed the chicken coop. Through this preeminent taxing and spending authority, the federal government was then able to circumvent virtually all of its Constitutional restrictions. More recently, a clearly unconstitutional 55 mph national speed limit was imposed by withholding federal highway dollars if States did not "voluntarily" adopt this limit.

There are certain areas where a broad consensus exits for the legitimate exercise of federal power. However, these have long been exceeded by political interest groups who have realized that they can exert their will on the entire nation by targeting specific Congressional elections with huge outside contributions. This may be the best argument for public financing of these elections.

At this point, the only way to limit federal imposition and reexert state authority may be for 2/3 of the States to call for a Constitutional Convention. Despite predictions of doom from its opponents, any proposed Constitutional Amendments resulting from this procedure would still require ratification by 3/4 of the States; the only difference being that it could not be held hostage by a small group of activists in the House or Senate.

 

[g5000]

Okay. Presto! You have a constitutional convention.

Now...what amendments/repeals are you putting before this convention, sir?

 

[g5000]

Amendment 28: Because Obama!

 

[OKTexas]

An Article 5 Amendment Convention has already been requested by every State in the Union, Congress has ignored them, why do you think that will change? Here's a link to the request, check it out.

Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A Constitutional Convention is Needed

No, it isn't.

 

[g5000]

An Article 5 Amendment Convention has already been requested by every State in the Union, Congress has ignored them, why do you think that will change? Here's a link to the request, check it our.

Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

Can you name an amendment which has been requested by every State in the Union?

Sure, every state has asked for a convention at one time or another in the past couple hundred years, but never enough at the same time for the same reason.


Why is it you guys can't specify what you want? Tells us what amendments/repeals you want to enact.

Then show us where enough states have asked for the same thing and you have a case!

 

[OKTexas]

An Article 5 Amendment Convention has already been requested by every State in the Union, Congress has ignored them, why do you think that will change? Here's a link to the request, check it our.

Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

Can you name an amendment which has been requested by every State in the Union?

Sure, every state has asked for a convention at one time or another in the past couple hundred years, but never enough at the same time for the same reason.


Why is it you guys can't specify what you want? Tells us what amendments/repeals you want to enact.

Then show us where enough states have asked for the same thing and you have a case!

Show me in article 5 where a request has an experation date or all have to ask for the same reason. The prupose of a convention is to propose admendments. Read it.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

At this point, the only way to limit federal imposition and reexert state authority may be for 2/3 of the States to call for a Constitutional Convention. Despite predictions of doom from its opponents, any proposed Constitutional Amendments resulting from this procedure would still require ratification by 3/4 of the States; the only difference being that it could not be held hostage by a small group of activists in the House or Senate.

That's the problem. I can't imagine you'd get 3/4 of the states to agree on anything at this point, other than possibly dissolving the Union entirely.

I personally am in favor of seeing it happen just to see what comes out of it. I'd love to see what clarification would come out of such a convention on topics like Gun Control, Abortion, and Religious Freedom. Of course, given the current politics, I'd probably rather watch it happen from some other country.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Okay. Presto! You have a constitutional convention.

Now...what amendments/repeals are you putting before this convention, sir?

If it were me, target number one would be ending the use of the filibuster (or any legislative trick) to hold up the nomination process in the Senate. It's no more acceptable to me that Bush couldn't sit his choice of folks than it is that Obama can't. And it's getting to be a real issue when it comes to the Federal Judges.

 

[g5000]

An Article 5 Amendment Convention has already been requested by every State in the Union, Congress has ignored them, why do you think that will change? Here's a link to the request, check it our.

Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

Can you name an amendment which has been requested by every State in the Union?

Sure, every state has asked for a convention at one time or another in the past couple hundred years, but never enough at the same time for the same reason.


Why is it you guys can't specify what you want? Tells us what amendments/repeals you want to enact.

Then show us where enough states have asked for the same thing and you have a case!

Show me in article 5 where a request has an experation date or all have to ask for the same reason. The prupose of a convention is to propose admendments. Read it.

Show me where 2/3 of the states have called for a generic Constitutional convention, and not for specific amendments to be ratified by convention.

 

[OKTexas]

Can you name an amendment which has been requested by every State in the Union?

Sure, every state has asked for a convention at one time or another in the past couple hundred years, but never enough at the same time for the same reason.


Why is it you guys can't specify what you want? Tells us what amendments/repeals you want to enact.

Then show us where enough states have asked for the same thing and you have a case!

Show me in article 5 where a request has an experation date or all have to ask for the same reason. The prupose of a convention is to propose admendments. Read it.

Show me where 2/3 of the states have called for a generic Constitutional convention, and not for specific amendments to be ratified by convention.

There is no requirement for a state to give a reason, the requirement is they ask for a convention, which they have done. It's up to the delegations from the states to decide on the amendments to be considered, not congress. If enough states ask, congress is obligated to call the convention constitutionally. You can try to pull the BS your accusing others of doing on this board or you can be honest and go by the text of Article 5. There is not requirement for a subject for a request, there is no shelf life placed on a request, the only requirement is 2/3 of the states call for a convention, which has been done.

 

[Clementine]

First order of business should be the people's government taking control away from the federal reserve and putting the responsibility back where it belongs.

Seems nothing is temporary with government. Once they fool people into allowing them to usurp our rights because of some dire emergency, they never give up that power.

 

[BlindBoo]

IMO the first order of bunisess is a term limit amendment for congress cirtters.

Next will be an amendment forbidding congress critters from exempting themselves from the laws.

 

[g5000]

Show me in article 5 where a request has an experation date or all have to ask for the same reason. The prupose of a convention is to propose admendments. Read it.

Show me where 2/3 of the states have called for a generic Constitutional convention, and not for specific amendments to be ratified by convention.

There is no requirement for a state to give a reason, the requirement is they ask for a convention, which they have done. It's up to the delegations from the states to decide on the amendments to be considered, not congress. If enough states ask, congress is obligated to call the convention constitutionally. You can try to pull the BS your accusing others of doing on this board or you can be honest and go by the text of Article 5. There is not requirement for a subject for a request, there is no shelf life placed on a request, the only requirement is 2/3 of the states call for a convention, which has been done.

I don't think you understand Article V, and I doubt you have read a single state's request for a convention.

 

[g5000]

An Article 5 Amendment Convention has already been requested by every State in the Union, Congress has ignored them, why do you think that will change? Here's a link to the request, check it our.

Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

Can you name an amendment which has been requested by every State in the Union?

Sure, every state has asked for a convention at one time or another in the past couple hundred years, but never enough at the same time for the same reason.


Why is it you guys can't specify what you want? Tells us what amendments/repeals you want to enact.

Then show us where enough states have asked for the same thing and you have a case!

Show me in article 5 where a request has an experation date or all have to ask for the same reason. The prupose of a convention is to propose admendments. Read it.

Here is a list of requests for conventions: Friends of the Article V Convention - Congressional Records

748 requests.

Now, if any old request is good enough for a convention, and they don't have an expiration date, then why are there 748 requests? Wouldn't 34 be enough?

So you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Are there any where 34 states asked for a convention for the same purpose? I see a few "General Call for an Article V Convention" on there, but quite a few are repeated requests by the same states. Wisconsin has made 10 alone.

And would a request still be valid if everyone involved is long dead? I doubt it.

 

[g5000]

I count 51 General Calls for an Article V Convention.

10 were made by Wisconsin.

3 each were made by Wyoming and Louisiana.

2 each by Tennessee, Iowa, Georgia, Virginia.

There are more repeats, but those are enough to show that 34 states have not made a General Call for an Article V Convention.

 

[g5000]

On that same list to which I linked are calls for an Article V convention for the purpose of the direct election of US Senators. While the necessary threshold was not reached to call an Article V convention for that purpose, the number of calls did provide the momentum needed to prod Congress to pass the 17th amendment through the usual process.

 

[regent]

All of our constitutional amendments have been at the request of the congress, and, except for one, passed by the congress. Today the congress usually puts a time limits on amendment actions, seven years. There may be an amendment or two still floating about, however.

 

[OKTexas]

Show me where 2/3 of the states have called for a generic Constitutional convention, and not for specific amendments to be ratified by convention.

There is no requirement for a state to give a reason, the requirement is they ask for a convention, which they have done. It's up to the delegations from the states to decide on the amendments to be considered, not congress. If enough states ask, congress is obligated to call the convention constitutionally. You can try to pull the BS your accusing others of doing on this board or you can be honest and go by the text of Article 5. There is not requirement for a subject for a request, there is no shelf life placed on a request, the only requirement is 2/3 of the states call for a convention, which has been done.

I don't think you understand Article V, and I doubt you have read a single state's request for a convention.

I do understand Article 5 it says, "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;". The convention is for proposing amendments and there is no limit on subject matter which is one major pitfall of a convention. And yes I've read several of the applications, do you have one in particular you want to discuss?

 

[OKTexas]

I count 51 General Calls for an Article V Convention.

10 were made by Wisconsin.

3 each were made by Wyoming and Louisiana.

2 each by Tennessee, Iowa, Georgia, Virginia.

There are more repeats, but those are enough to show that 34 states have not made a General Call for an Article V Convention.

So you're saying that because a state provided more information than was necessary nullifies that request? Really? How do you square that with your analytical thinking?