8575447252?profile=originalMany people that are afraid the convention consisting of delegates from the states would be a disaster if those selected to participate were representatives of the Republican and Democratic Parties. In order to insure that the most qualified men and women are selected, I would like to suggest that one delegate be elected from each of the state's Congressional Districts. All candidates would run without party affiliation and would be chosen based on their knowledge of the Constitution, the proposed amendments that they would support at the Article V Convention.

Each state would have one delegate for every Congressional District and each state would have one vote on each amendment proposed to the delegates. If the majority of delegates vote in favor of a proposed amendment, that state's vote would be in the affirmative.

If two thirds of the states vote in favor of a proposed amendment it would be forwarded to the legislatures of the states for their consideration. If 38 states vote for ratification the amendment would become a part of the Constitution for the united States.

To insure the integrity of the convention, I suggest that convicted felons, republicans, democrats and all lawyers all be banned from participating in the Convention of the States to propose amendments to the Constitution for the united States.

You need to be a member of Constitution Club - 2020 Vision 4 America to add comments!

Join Constitution Club - 2020 Vision 4 America

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • ALSO ANYONE ON THE GOVERNMENT PAY ROLL..PLEASE SEE THE ORIGINAL ELECTORAL COLLEGE BOOK ...MORE TO COME ..BIG CORPORATIONS TO

  • Lee, thank you for your input. I personally feel that people that receive government entitlements should be stripped of their right to vote while they are receiving benefits.

  • Also, what standards would certify they are knowledgeable in the Constitutional requirements?
  • Please remember, it doesn't count who you vote for, but who counts the votes.  Would there be a test that each candidate would pass before their name could be put on the ballot?   Even those who have the most knowledge may not use it for the best of this nation.   I think a ConCon would be bad for this time.   Let's just enforce the present Constitution.....WOW....what an original idea.   

  • While I believe that many of the problems we face today are the result of the activities of corrupt bankers, lawyers and politicians, I don't believe that  everyone that is a member of these classes is evil. Any individual that loves his or her country and the principles of individual liberty and personal responsibility should have the right to be chosen to participate in an Article V Convention. 

  • IN THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION ELECTIONS 1788 1792 1796 1800 ..IF THE STATE VOTE WAS TIED THE STATE LOST ITS VOTE..THE JOHN BIRCH IS AGAINST A CON CON,, THE CONSTITUION PARTY WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE WISE MEN WAY TO GET CANDAITES FOR PRESIDENT,, THEY BY PASS THE PARTIES ALL THE WAY 

  • ALSO I WAS THINKING ABOUT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND CORPORATE 500 EXECUTIVES OR 1000 EXES

  • Perhaps there should be a test to certify which individuals are knowledgeable on the Constitution and the principles of liberty. Only individuals that pass the test and are certified would be eligible to run for Congress or any any elective office at the city, county, state or federal level.  

    Josh Draken said:

    Also, what standards would certify they are knowledgeable in the Constitutional requirements?
  • I keep hearing that SS is an entitlement I don't understand why you think it is. I pay into SS and have since I was 14 years old. if I were to collect SS then I would not be able to vote? Why is something that I have paid into my whole working life considered an entitlement. 

    Thanks Keith

    Joe Allen

    Keith Broaders said:

    Lee, thank you for your input. I personally feel that people that receive government entitlements should be stripped of their right to vote while they are receiving benefits.

  • Social Security is not an entitlement. It is simply a repayment of money that was previously stolen from you by the government. 

This reply was deleted.