Course of Action
Please take note, that although the goals of COS are laudable, the question remains.
What makes you think "they" are going to "listen" to us this time and follow the "rules" of ANY new amendment?
I have personally proposed 43 new Amendments to the existing document(s). I know that Jon Roland has proposed over thirty changes he would see made. The problem is that calling a convention with the stated goal of tying down the hands of Govco, Inc. to the edicts and restrictions of a document they are currently ignoring is bound to end up fruitless if we can't muster massive enforcement capabilities.
IE - The Militia - The Fourth Branch of governing "of, by and for the people". With an enforcement arm in place, we could repair the damage. We could address Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, of the Constitution. This would place over ten thousand new people in Congress, with not one Representative serving any more than thirty thousand constituents and assembling to pass laws for about 6 weeks a year and getting paid only for the days they work. That way ordinary citizens could serve and still keep their regular jobs if they wished. There would be:
- NO retirement bennies,
- NO special treatment under the law,
- NO bribery for access to great power,
- NO special privileges,
- NO special health plan,
- NO private schools,
- NO check floating,
- NO corruption of our voice.
Regular people would fill those seats and would have a very simple and small office placed within walking distance of every one of their constituents. They would only pass laws for 6 weeks of the year, barring any emergency sessions. They would be paid quite well compared to the national average and could easily afford to attend these sessions. After all there is very little for a "limited" government to do, so their work could easily be done within the prescribed 6 weeks.
To accomplish this I believe we need to distribute petitions within our own counties to elect ordinary people to address the need to fill these empty seats. In my County alone, there is a need for 23 new people to be seated. If we need to have an Article V Convention to get something done, then that's what we should do. But if this won't help them listen any better than they do now, then we're wasting our time.
Comments? Questions?
Replies
But the "Government" and I use that term loosely, needs to be moved out of the British owned District of Columbia. We need the People of America *** land not Corporation to stop paying income tax but instead use that money to buy the Military to enforce our agenda. Then use the military only if invaded. Teach children in our homes and school friendship honesty and forgiveness. Reach out to other countries with a open hand not a gun. Use parts of Africa for all our food to grow. Use magnetic generators for power, air powered cars like France. But maybe I'm just wishful thinking.
A wish is a seed awaiting germination!
Charles
If 'they' don't/won't' adhere to Article VI, then how would Article V insure 'they' would be so inclined to do so?
Article 6 (not 5) is the Solution!
https://drive.google.com/file/ d/0B5osUEitCWr0UVFRZndaaVJDYTA /view
My proposed amendments are at http://constitution.org/reform/us/con_amend.htm
Now ask how likely is it that the likely delegates to a "convention of states" would propose anything comparable to any of our proposed amendments. The likelihood is near zero. More likely a bunch of lame amendments that would make things worse, even if they were enforced.
Why wouldn't you be one of the "delegates" Jon? Propose them yourself.
Who is going to appoint me to be a delegate? Delegates are most likely to be selected much the same way delegates to national party conventions are selected. Imagine a joint session of half-drunken Republicans and Democrats trying to deliberate and adopt a platform, much less constitutional amendments, which are far more difficult to develop.
The delegates are NOT going to be selected from among people like us, or who have the necessary expertise. It will not happen. At most you may have delegates from some of the states carrying lame proposed amendments that got the approval of a small subset of the legislature (which generally is not competent to develop amendments even to state constitutions).
See the results of a recent conference of constitutional scholars, reported by Mike Greve (who generally agrees with us). http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/05/25/amending-the-constitution-...
They could only agree on one amendment, the old Equal Rights amendment, which is superfluous if the 14th Amendment is interpreted correctly.
First of all, I believe every state has their own system for gaining delegates to a convention. Some are elected, some appointed, but all delegates should be obligated to propose and support ONLY what they were sent to accomplish, nothing more, nothing less.
Maybe, once we all can settle on an agreeable definition of what exactly 'IS' is we might then be able to move forward to define the few enumerated powers HERE given to our 'creature'. Sadly, sometimes WTP just need to remain steadfast and say NO. Say NO to the out of touch, overreaching, deaf/blind, and otherwise 'criminal' tyrannical Government. No doesn't require a lot of effort just support.
I am certain the delegates would not propose anything that even remotely resemble your proposed amendments as that is NOT their goal. I question who will nominate the 'Faithful Delegates', and to whom will their loyalty be. I question Will they be given full immunity from prosecution for their decisions? I question Will the convention be held in secrecy as before?
I am reminded of the delegates and their decision of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 which did not bode well for the states, and more recently of the 'Faithful Delegates' of 2016 election cycle going against party lines.
To quote Justice Scalia, " I certainly would not want a Constitutional Convention. I mean whoa. Who knows what would come out of that?"
An Article V, is a perfect solution, for an imperfect situation, by imperfect people, wanting a perfect world. Realistically, I know that we have all listened, and spoken to liberal, progressive people. Their goal is to further their agenda, by any means, and at any cost. With them, the ends do justify the means. How many times have we elected someone based on what they said and promised to do, and once elected, did just the opposite. It would not take to many people who were delegates, to change the direction of a COS as proposed, if those people had an agenda different than the COS. There is no controlling a delegate once the doors are closed on a COS. Anyone who believes there is, believes in fairy tales. We've seen it so many times before, and in this case, our Constitution as we know it, is at stake. I believe that when our Constitution was written, a different time, honor was very important, and your word was your honor. We see very little of that today. I believe the COS, in today's environment, is Constitutional Suicide. It should be called, COSS. I don't know the solution, but I do know that a COS today, is NOT the answer we are looking for or want.
I'd like to hear more about these "magnetic generators". If you could expound upon this, I believe it might be helpful. Thanks.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next