The Founding Fathers provided us with two methods of amending the Constitution. They provided two methods because they knew that the Congress would one day become corrupt and that the states would need to be able to step in a fix the problems that Congress would inevitably create,
Article V does not provide for a Con Con, it provides for a Convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. Plan "A" allows Congress to propose amendments and Plan "B" allows the the States to propose Amendments via a Convention.
When two-thirds of the states request a Convention for the purpose of proposing Amendments, Congress must call for the Convention or violate the Constitution.
The Convention only has the authority to propose amendments. The adoption of any proposed Amendment would require the approval of 38 of the states. This is the check the Founders gave us to prevent bad amendments from being adopted.
If the delegates were agents of the Obama Administration proposed bad amendments the states would reject them. The power to amend the Constitution would be in the hands of people in the 50 states.
Congress currently controls which Amendments the States are allowed to consider. Congress is controlled by the enemies of the people and prevents amendments that will diminish their power from being introduced. If a Convention were held the delegates elected by the people of the respective states would have the power that Congress now has. The question is do you trust more, Congress or a delegation of representatives elected by the people?
The crime syndicate likes things the way they are. They control all three branches of government and they write the laws, interpret the laws and enforce the laws and ignore the Constitution when it gets in their way.
Because there has never been an Article V Convention it is not clear exactly how the delegates to the Convention would be selected. There are Constitutional Scholars that believe that the legislatures of the states would determine who and how many delegates they would have. There are others that believe that in order to comply with the 14th Amendment the Article V Convention would need a number of delegates equal members in Congress. They believe that each state would be entitled to 2 delegates to match their representation in the Senate plus one additional delegate for each Congressional District in their respective state.
The 14th Amendment requires that citizens in same class need to be treated equally under the law. Since members of Congress and delegates of an Article V Convention both have the right to propose amendments to the Constitution, they need to meet the same qualifications and must be elected in the same manner.
The Constitution does not provide the Supreme Court with the authority to Amendment the Constitution, but whenever the clowns in the gowns misinterpret the Constitution they can amend the Constitution by changing its meaning. The Court has become a perpetual Convention to Amendment the Constitution. Trusting 9 political hacks that wear black dresses that are selected by the President and confirmed by the Senate are agents of the same crime syndicate that prints the worthless Federal Reserve Notes.
Once 34 states states have applied for a Convention, Congress has no choice. They must call for the Convention or violate their oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, Those that are opposed to calling for a Convention once the requisite number of 34 states have been reached and opposed to the Constitution.
Those opposing the Convention are either agents of the status quo or well intended individuals that have been deceived by the enemies of the Constitution.
The convening of a Convention to amend the Constitution would take the power away from Congress and give it to the people of the fifty states. Why is it risky to trust the people and not risky to trust Congress? If we were to transfer the power from Congress to the States to propose Amendments, what is the potential risk?
If it does come to new Amendments,I think one of the FIRST should be one that sets actions and penalties for crimes against America or against the Constitution. There seems to be an abundance of places in our Constitution and Bill of Rights where it is stated that certain things are illegal,but no specific means of recourse is given,nor any specific penalty for these violations. Here,again,I believe the reason these laws are violated is because the perpetrators know they CAN'T be enforced.
Please forgive my ignorance on this subject,but I voice my concerns in hopes that I can learn,and make some sense of why what's happening IS happening.
Online Professor said:
Jeanine, You said Everyone is too stupid. We just need to follow God's Law as written in the Constitution. The Article V has two provisions to propose amendments to the Constitution. Both the Congressional and the Convention methods were endorsed by the Founding Fathers.
The states would never had ratified the Constitution if they did not have the power by pass Congress and propose amendments to the Constitution. If Congress proposes a lousy amendment only 38 states would need to ratify it. If a Convention proposed a lousy amendment it too would need to be ratified by 38 states.
Is a Convention of the people more dangerous than a Congress that is working for the International Bankers?
If the Constitution were being followed we wouldn't need any new amendments. Unless "We the People" enforce the Constitution our nation is doomed.
There have been over 700 applications for an Article V Convention submitted by each of the 50 states. Go to the following tables to see the evidence.