In the wording of Article V, when two-thirds of the states submit applications to Congress for an Article V Convention, it is the responsibility of Congress to call for a convention.

Congress would choose its time and place for the convention. The states would have the power to determine how many delegates they would send and how those delegates would be chosen.

If the delegates were chosen by the state legislatures, the integrity of the convention would be in serious jeopardy. If an election were held in each of the 435 Congressional Districts to choose the delegates, I would favor the calling of an Article V Convention only if the delegates were given instructions by the state legislatures on which proposed amendments they would be authorized to ratify and were restricted to those amendments.

Each state legislature would need to instruct their delegates on which proposed amendments they would be authorized to support. Any delegate who violated the instructions would be subject to arrest and prosecution.

Before I would support an Article V Convention,  I would want the assurance that the delegates would be responsible to follow the instructions of their state  legislatures and that they would be chosen by voters in each of the Congressional Districts.

To call for a convention before the states agree on the ground rules would be unwise and in my opinion a serious mistake.

Views: 157

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The pervasive faith in an Art. V Convention is misguided and overblown. I don't know why Art. V adherents can't understand that if we want DC to abide by the Constitution then we must first ensure that they enforce the existing Constitution. A perfectly fine document IF IT IS ENFORCED.

There is absolutely no need for a COS. None. The best way to ensure the fed's compliance with the Constitution is STATE NULLIFICATION which both Madison and Jefferson advocated, the latter describing nullification as THE "rightful remedy" to federal overreach.

That said, there is still need to amend the Constitution, e.g. repealing the 17th Amendment, imposing term limits and more State control over the appointment and removal of Supreme Court Justices. But, that can be done in the time-honored way; the amendment process. 

Join me on the Convention of States Conference Call tonight Tue. 8/8/2017 at 7pm Eastern, 

Click Here - https://global.gotowebinar.com/join/2425508740086411009/253280972

We also need some language clarification. The misinterpretation of the Supremacy Clause, Commerce Clause, Welfare Clause. Courts have been so wrong.

And how about some definitions of words, so clarity becomes a part of the improvements too.

In the days of the "founders", honesty was a given standard.Today it would be near impossible to find one state with a group of people, any group, where a majority would have the same interest in mind. A serious and honest Art.V investigation, let alone an informal fact finding mission. I wouldn't trust any group from anywhere U.S.A. to be entrusted with an Art.V convention. Too much swamp to be emptied! I agree!

I agree Keith.  For those reasons you outlined, plus a few more.  However, those who are pushing and advocating the COS have blinders on.  They choose to ignore the fact that it would be almost impossible to control the state delegates.  he most serious, is that once the doors are closed to a COS, no one, including the states, can control what goes on behind those doors.  Just look at todays' politics and dirty tricks.  They would put their trust in people like this.  Hard to figure.

The problem with all of that is the amount of representation the people should have, Again, because the number of delegates is based on existing representation elsewhere, the current 435 + 100 we have now would be the number. That is a problem because we currently stand in violation of Article I, Section 2, Clause 3,  which mandates that "Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand...".

So instead of 535 delegates, we the people would be sending over 10,000 LOCAL delegates, who would represent no more than 30,000 constituents each, giving larger voice to the people, where an Article V convention might be able to function. Without that stipulation in place, an Art. V Convention is ill advised.

RSS

© 2017   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service