Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Mitch 9 years, 3 months ago
    I like what Mark Levin has to say about the Liberty Amendments and think it’s worth doing but I read a counter point to the idea of invoking the Convention of States. The issue is that once a Convention is enacted by the States through Article V, any amendments can be added for consideration by any state.

    Could you imagine what would happen to the whole process once a few of the left wing groups realize that they too can add amendments? I think they would win by simply confusing everyone that doesn’t really pay attention to all of the details. I know it’s the State legislation that is voting but imaging the confusion by citizens that are not paying attention, the misinformation campaigns and the state legislators with their own agendas. It truly would put our Constitution into jeopardy.

    This would have to be enacted by a group of people not only truly interested in saving our federation and Constitution but also with drive, determination and money to support it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 3 months ago
      There are ways to prevent a "run-away" convention. Plus, any proposed amendments would need to be ratified by 3/4 of the states, so it would be self regulating.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by sumitch 9 years, 3 months ago
      I heartedly agree with you. It would be like putting the fox in the hen house. Much of our Constitution is violated every month by members of congress so I'm not sure that they spend more time violating it rather than supporting it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by voodoo59 9 years, 3 months ago
      That's the problem. The lefties would inundate the process with their agenda (standard operating procedure) and "compromise" to their advantage. I'm also afraid to risk letting their ridiculous ideas see the light of day. Simply putting it on paper is enough to legitimize these wacky ideas in their eyes.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
    I think that an Article V Convention is a good idea, but that - like playing jump rope - timing is all important. Right now, we still have a culture that endorses endowment and suppresses freedom. (We are doing better now than we were a few years ago, please note.) If we can get some spectacularly obvious 'fails' on endowment (ACA) and the climate of politics swings a bit further in the direction of self-sufficiency, then we will be safer to call an Article V Convention and have amendments proposed and voted into existence that we want to have. Right now, I do fear that an amendment would make endowment a 'right' and gun ownership 'not a right'.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by sfdi1947 9 years, 3 months ago
    Actually Mitch, that's not how it works. While any State, not any Group or Ideological Block, can propose an amendment, it requires a 2/3rds Majority of States Legislatures to approve an amendment, and there are 29 Red States and 21 Blue States. So while Red has a clear majority, they still need at least one Blue State to change anything: therefore, Change is possible if the change is reasonable. Herein I wonder about the affect of Lobbying Slugs.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 9 years, 3 months ago
    How would anyone stop the convention from "running away"? Technically the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was a runaway convention. The original mandate was to amend the Articles of Confederation.

    In fact, I suggested, in another forum, that Mister Thompson would get elected Head of the State after a runaway coinvention destroyed the present Constitution.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 9 years, 3 months ago
    I suggest amending the Declaration of Independence (yeah, I know).

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights AND RESPONSIBILITIES, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

    I have taught my grandsons that whenever they use the word "rights" in a sentence, they better fit the word "responsibilities" in it somewhere.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 3 months ago
    The big problem with the convention process is that Congress has to agree to call the convention -- and won't. All 50 states have passed calls for an Article V convention that are still in effect -- see foavc.org. But there is no way to force Congress to act on them. The courts won't.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by xthinker88 9 years, 3 months ago
    Article V Convention would lead to a complete victory by the statists as they remove the 2nd amendment. Increase federal power. Etc.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by gtebbe 9 years, 3 months ago
      If this is your opinion, I think you need to re-read Article 5.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by xthinker88 9 years, 3 months ago
        "...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,"

        Got to love how conservatives think that amendments would only be theirs. That's just not the way the country is going. No part of the Constitution is safe from such a convention. Except for state suffrage.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 3 months ago
          You seem to overlook that any proposed amendment would first need to be agreed to be sent to the states by 2/3 of the states, and then ratified by 3/4 of them to become part of the Constitution. That's a pretty high bar.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by xthinker88 9 years, 3 months ago
            Really? Look at the things that the states do and the Fed currently does that are not really allowable under the existing constitution.

            But the same high bar goes either way. Without a series of galvanizing incident neither "side" would have 3/4 of the states ratifying. But crises always go in favor of federal power.

            The states were stupid enough to give up their direct representation of their legislatures in the US Senate. All it takes is a wave of progressivism and some galvanizing crisis.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 9 years, 3 months ago
              No doubt. From a practical perspective, the Constitution is irrelevant. The whim of nine persons (well, really only one) is where our nation is today - there is no rule of law, but rule of lawyers.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by xthinker88 9 years, 3 months ago
      Actually there is a novel that envisions just such an event. I think it is the Enemies Foreign and Domestic series. Massive gun control. implementation of increased enforcement of UN mandates. Etc.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo