Basically Article V
U.S. Constitution - Article 4 Section 4
Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
The States can now take action as Obama is in direct violation of this Article of the Constitution.
20 words that will change the way we live
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/the-28th-amendment.html
One Person, One Vote;
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-texas-wrong-one-person-one-vote-case
Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
The States can now take action as Obama is in direct violation of this Article of the Constitution.
20 words that will change the way we live
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/the-28th-amendment.html
One Person, One Vote;
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-texas-wrong-one-person-one-vote-case
THE OTHER WAY TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION;
THE ARTICLE V CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
AMENDMENT PROCESS
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No3_Rogersonline.pdf
The Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress Thomas H. Neale Specialist in American National Government March 29, 2016
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42589.pdf
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42589.pdf
What Did Texas and Indiana Know in the 1950s that Has Been Forgotten?
What if two-thirds of the states had the power to propose amendments to the
U.S. Constitution as easily as two-thirds of each House of Congress?
Well, that's what the Founders told us!
Not once.
Not twice.
Not thrice.
*But at least six times *the Founders told us that two-thirds of the states
could apply for the proposal of *any desired amendment *using their power
to organize a convention for proposing amendments under Article V of the
U.S. Constitution.
The Founders *never* said that the Article V convention itself must be
responsible for drafting amendments. Instead, they said the convention
would do whatever two-thirds of the states requested in their "application"
to Congress.
Texas and Indiana knew this in the 1950s, when they applied for a
convention of the states under Article V by advancing a specific amendment
and convention rules proposal in their application.
*In Compact for America Educational Foundation's Policy Brief No. 9, we
offer abundant proof that Texas and Indiana were right in saying "nope" in
response to the frequently asked question, "Doesn't the Article V
Convention Draft the Amendment?"
<http://media.wix.com/ugd/e48202_33eb5c71010e4f30a77a39239a4fe657.pdf>*
We demonstrate conclusively that the Compact for America approach of
applying under Article V for the proposal of a specific and pre-drafted
amendment, together with all convention logistics, is fully consistent with
the original meaning of Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
*Check out Policy Brief No. 9 if you want to understand what Texas and
Indiana knew about the power of the states to laser-target an Article V
convention to any desired amendment!
<http://media.wix.com/ugd/e48202_33eb5c71010e4f30a77a39239a4fe657.pdf>*
And if you like what you see, please support the Compact for America effort
with a tax deductible donation.
<http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!donate/cszb>
Very truly yours,
Nick Dranias
President & Executive Director
*Compact for America Educational Foundation, Inc.*
2323 Clear Lake City Blvd., Ste 180-190
Houston, TX 77062
Mobile: 602-228-2582
Office: 602-539-2703
Fax: 602-483-1658
Email: Nick.Dranias@CompactforAmerica.org
Website: www.CompactforAmerica.org
U.S. Constitution as easily as two-thirds of each House of Congress?
Well, that's what the Founders told us!
Not once.
Not twice.
Not thrice.
*But at least six times *the Founders told us that two-thirds of the states
could apply for the proposal of *any desired amendment *using their power
to organize a convention for proposing amendments under Article V of the
U.S. Constitution.
The Founders *never* said that the Article V convention itself must be
responsible for drafting amendments. Instead, they said the convention
would do whatever two-thirds of the states requested in their "application"
to Congress.
Texas and Indiana knew this in the 1950s, when they applied for a
convention of the states under Article V by advancing a specific amendment
and convention rules proposal in their application.
*In Compact for America Educational Foundation's Policy Brief No. 9, we
offer abundant proof that Texas and Indiana were right in saying "nope" in
response to the frequently asked question, "Doesn't the Article V
Convention Draft the Amendment?"
<http://media.wix.com/ugd/e48202_33eb5c71010e4f30a77a39239a4fe657.pdf>*
We demonstrate conclusively that the Compact for America approach of
applying under Article V for the proposal of a specific and pre-drafted
amendment, together with all convention logistics, is fully consistent with
the original meaning of Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
*Check out Policy Brief No. 9 if you want to understand what Texas and
Indiana knew about the power of the states to laser-target an Article V
convention to any desired amendment!
<http://media.wix.com/ugd/e48202_33eb5c71010e4f30a77a39239a4fe657.pdf>*
And if you like what you see, please support the Compact for America effort
with a tax deductible donation.
<http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!donate/cszb>
Very truly yours,
Nick Dranias
President & Executive Director
*Compact for America Educational Foundation, Inc.*
2323 Clear Lake City Blvd., Ste 180-190
Houston, TX 77062
Mobile: 602-228-2582
Office: 602-539-2703
Fax: 602-483-1658
Email: Nick.Dranias@CompactforAmerica.org
Website: www.CompactforAmerica.org
A Majority of the Several States to Propose an Amendment NOVEMBER 8, 2015 BY FRITZ PETTYJOHN
The federal government was created when the states ratified the Constitution. The Framers, and the people, wanted it to have limited power, and those limitations were clearly described. The states, and the people, did not surrender their sovereignty, they shared it. Over time those limitations have been exceeded. Today the federal government recognizes virtually no limits to its power. Federalism, the sharing of power, is seen as an inconvenience and can be ignored. Challenges to the power of Congress are ridiculed. The Framers were aware of this danger. They wanted to give the states the power to rein in the federal government, if necessary. Article V was placed in the Constitution for this purpose.
The Reagan Project is a volunteer political organization dedicated to the promotion of Article V, and the power of the states. By adopting a Balanced Budget Amendment, through Article V, the states will not only rescue the country from impending financial ruin. They will restore federalism, and return power to the people. The balance of power, between the states and the federal government, will be restored. Article V is the last safeguard of our freedom. Let’s use it.
The weakness of the COS plan
At a convention of the states to propose an amendment to the Constitution, the vote of a majority of the several states is sufficient to propose an amendment.
Some individuals preparing the rules for a convention of the states believe a vote of a super majority (34) of the states should be required in order to propose an amendment.
They base their argument on the premise that if the convention cannot get 2/3rds of the states to propose, then the amendment could not gain the required 3/4ths (38) to ratify.
The proponents assume a great deal regarding the amount of power and influence a handful of delegates at the convention have over how a legislature, which has yet to be elected, will vote on a proposed amendment.
The ratification process will extend at least seven years from when Congress returns it to the legislatures for ratification. During that period there are at least three election cycles.
No amendment has ever been ratified without the popular support of a large majority of the people. The people will determine if an amendment is ratified, not the current composition of a state legislature. The political composition of a legislature could change based upon the popularity of the amendment.
Additionally, the proponents also argue that if Congress needs 2/3rds to propose, the Convention should be required to have 2/3rds to propose.
Forgotten in this argument is the fact the states have already met a 2/3rds threshold through the arduous process of securing 2/3rds (34) of the states to pass a resolution to convene the convention. This process required at least 138 affirmative votes for the amendment subject which includes 68 committee votes and 68 floor votes.
To then require the convention to have a 2/3rds requirement to propose would be similar to requiring a state legislature to have a 3/4ths majority in both houses to ratify an amendment, as the Constitution requires 3/4ths of the states to ratify an amendment. In almost every state, a simple majority is required.
Requiring a greater vote than a majority of the states (26) at a convention will likely result in either a very weak amendment being proposed which would prevent it from being ratified or a deadlocked convention.
Should a majority of the states settle on the language of an amendment and there is a requirement to have the support of more states, the minority will then control the amendment language. This will cause a dilution in the “quality of the amendment.”
The further away the threshold of states to propose is from a majority, the greater the influence of the minority, as for each state needed above the majority, each additional state will place its demands upon the language.
This will eventually cause the amendment language to be far from the will of the majority which will result in proposing an amendment which the majority will not support during ratification or a deadlocked convention if the minority refuses to participate.
The issue of whether an amendment will be ratified rests with the “quality” of the amendment and not its perceived ability to be ratified at the time it is proposed. The people will examine the amendment and determine if it has merit.
William H. Fruth
National Co-Founder, Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force
http://reaganproject.com/2015/11/08/a-majority-of-the-several-states-to-propose-an-amendment/
The federal government was created when the states ratified the Constitution. The Framers, and the people, wanted it to have limited power, and those limitations were clearly described. The states, and the people, did not surrender their sovereignty, they shared it. Over time those limitations have been exceeded. Today the federal government recognizes virtually no limits to its power. Federalism, the sharing of power, is seen as an inconvenience and can be ignored. Challenges to the power of Congress are ridiculed. The Framers were aware of this danger. They wanted to give the states the power to rein in the federal government, if necessary. Article V was placed in the Constitution for this purpose.
The Reagan Project is a volunteer political organization dedicated to the promotion of Article V, and the power of the states. By adopting a Balanced Budget Amendment, through Article V, the states will not only rescue the country from impending financial ruin. They will restore federalism, and return power to the people. The balance of power, between the states and the federal government, will be restored. Article V is the last safeguard of our freedom. Let’s use it.
The weakness of the COS plan
At a convention of the states to propose an amendment to the Constitution, the vote of a majority of the several states is sufficient to propose an amendment.
Some individuals preparing the rules for a convention of the states believe a vote of a super majority (34) of the states should be required in order to propose an amendment.
They base their argument on the premise that if the convention cannot get 2/3rds of the states to propose, then the amendment could not gain the required 3/4ths (38) to ratify.
The proponents assume a great deal regarding the amount of power and influence a handful of delegates at the convention have over how a legislature, which has yet to be elected, will vote on a proposed amendment.
The ratification process will extend at least seven years from when Congress returns it to the legislatures for ratification. During that period there are at least three election cycles.
No amendment has ever been ratified without the popular support of a large majority of the people. The people will determine if an amendment is ratified, not the current composition of a state legislature. The political composition of a legislature could change based upon the popularity of the amendment.
Additionally, the proponents also argue that if Congress needs 2/3rds to propose, the Convention should be required to have 2/3rds to propose.
Forgotten in this argument is the fact the states have already met a 2/3rds threshold through the arduous process of securing 2/3rds (34) of the states to pass a resolution to convene the convention. This process required at least 138 affirmative votes for the amendment subject which includes 68 committee votes and 68 floor votes.
To then require the convention to have a 2/3rds requirement to propose would be similar to requiring a state legislature to have a 3/4ths majority in both houses to ratify an amendment, as the Constitution requires 3/4ths of the states to ratify an amendment. In almost every state, a simple majority is required.
Requiring a greater vote than a majority of the states (26) at a convention will likely result in either a very weak amendment being proposed which would prevent it from being ratified or a deadlocked convention.
Should a majority of the states settle on the language of an amendment and there is a requirement to have the support of more states, the minority will then control the amendment language. This will cause a dilution in the “quality of the amendment.”
The further away the threshold of states to propose is from a majority, the greater the influence of the minority, as for each state needed above the majority, each additional state will place its demands upon the language.
This will eventually cause the amendment language to be far from the will of the majority which will result in proposing an amendment which the majority will not support during ratification or a deadlocked convention if the minority refuses to participate.
The issue of whether an amendment will be ratified rests with the “quality” of the amendment and not its perceived ability to be ratified at the time it is proposed. The people will examine the amendment and determine if it has merit.
William H. Fruth
National Co-Founder, Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force
http://reaganproject.com/2015/11/08/a-majority-of-the-several-states-to-propose-an-amendment/
A VERY IMPORTANT VIDEO: Turley on Expansion of Presidential Powers: "We Have Become a Nation of Enablers"
The video in this article is important for everyone to watch: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/02/12/turley_on_expansion_of_presidential_powers_we_have_become_a_nation_of_enablers.html
We have an advocate for our Project!!
Please review this link that shows Mark Levin (conservative radio talk show host), advocating the Article V process. His upcoming book, "THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS" about this very subject is coming out in August of this year. Mark gives an excellent explanation of Article V and how it can save our Country.
http://therightscoop.com/must-listen-mark-levin-explains-how-we-can-rescue-america-from-tyranny/
http://therightscoop.com/must-listen-mark-levin-explains-how-we-can-rescue-america-from-tyranny/
Another Great Advocate for Article V!!
We invite you to view our site:
articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com
We have been working for the past few months developing this project and preparing all of the support material for it. We have considered the options that are available to address our broken government. We strongly believe that this is the only way that will peacefully, lawfully, and completely address the process of returning our government to The People and The States and our Founding Principles and Documents. We know the criticisms and the arguments against us. We seek to answer all of the questions. What remains is the same time honored test that has been given to each and everyone of us when presented with a proposed solution. Are you willing to believe and have faith in the potential-the truth-and the workability of an idea, or will the approach be negative. Success or failure are equally possible outcomes. We will succeed or fail depending on the positive or negative cooperation of our fellow citizens.
enough people....with enough conviction... who will serve and share enough dedication...and we pray we can find them and that there is enough time left to do all that is required.
We are non-partisan and non-affiliated. We believe that the Constitution says what it means, and means what it says. Our solution is very simple and it is the simplicity that makes it so perfect and achievable. You have to trace the source of what is wrong with government to understand how we can fix it. You have to be willing to un-learn and re-learn and understand and not-be-willing -to stand for anymore of being governed as a slave rather than accepting the responsibility of being the master.
Our Nation needs Americans to remember and return to the concept that this is a Country of many People-United as One People. May we all chose to work for something greater than any one of us is alone.
"Facilis descensus Averno. Sed retro!" [translation - The road to hell is easy - reconsider.]
We have been working for the past few months developing this project and preparing all of the support material for it. We have considered the options that are available to address our broken government. We strongly believe that this is the only way that will peacefully, lawfully, and completely address the process of returning our government to The People and The States and our Founding Principles and Documents. We know the criticisms and the arguments against us. We seek to answer all of the questions. What remains is the same time honored test that has been given to each and everyone of us when presented with a proposed solution. Are you willing to believe and have faith in the potential-the truth-and the workability of an idea, or will the approach be negative. Success or failure are equally possible outcomes. We will succeed or fail depending on the positive or negative cooperation of our fellow citizens.
enough people....with enough conviction... who will serve and share enough dedication...and we pray we can find them and that there is enough time left to do all that is required.
We are non-partisan and non-affiliated. We believe that the Constitution says what it means, and means what it says. Our solution is very simple and it is the simplicity that makes it so perfect and achievable. You have to trace the source of what is wrong with government to understand how we can fix it. You have to be willing to un-learn and re-learn and understand and not-be-willing -to stand for anymore of being governed as a slave rather than accepting the responsibility of being the master.
Our Nation needs Americans to remember and return to the concept that this is a Country of many People-United as One People. May we all chose to work for something greater than any one of us is alone.
"Facilis descensus Averno. Sed retro!" [translation - The road to hell is easy - reconsider.]
The courts again used the 14th amendment to put down the Louisiana school voucher program. Yes it does matter, the Congress and Executive use money to purchase States agreement to limit our freedoms and liberties to run our own schools, churches, local governments, land use and zoning, water rights, harvesting our natural resources for industrial uses. Yes, all this has been co-opted by the Federal Central Government and their “one size fits all” programs and laws - what NY or California needs is not required in most RED states.
As we all know the Federal government - Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary have not followed the Constitution from day one – Washington - the National Bank, Adams - the Alien and Sedition act, Jefferson the Louisiana purchase - the court cases of Marbury V Madison and McCullough V Maryland both were used by the Courts to grant themselves powers that exceeded the limits of Article III. So, they have now gone so far as to just rub it in our faces as did Obama in the "RECESS" appointments that the SCOTUS has now ruled were unconstitutional. So are all the Regulations and rules they had promulgated!
Most State Representatives are well aware of the Federal government using the Supremacy clause to force [via Courts] the State to act in a certain manner. The Federal government then bribes us with money like education funds for them to control our schools, the same with game management, fishing rules, farming rules, development rules, employment rules, wages paid for work, health care insurance, - if the State takes one dime they have agreed and now are contracted to do the wishes of the Federal government. Look at highways, airports and even railroads, all controlled in DC.
The local elected officials all know these problems but are hesitant to start a fight as they do not want to lose the Federal assistance money for sewer and water systems plus all the previously mentioned items. See we cannot vote new people to DC and get out of the problems - we have tried that for 50 years and we have failed to even alter the direction. As Einstein said: Continuing to repeat over and over for decades expecting a different result is a form of insanity.
Learn about how Article V can be used by the 38+ State legislatures to save the REPUBLIC. It is really not that complicated. We the People have a lot of help already in place - keep in mind that 28 States sued over the Constitutionality of Obamacare. There are 6 or 8 other States that have separate actions in the courts as we speak. So, if we the people bring pressure and support to the current legislature we can bring the corrections into the world of reality. Yes - it will cause a lot of disruption but those issues can be worked out - Each State must pay its share of the national debt and the cost of the military but the States would be in control as they have the money in hand, not the Federal government.
The savings by eliminating the duplication, thousands of agencies and sub-agencies will save trillions over the next 10 years. It will eliminate the high price of government pensions - let them participate in 401Ks and SS like the citizens. Eliminate special pensions for elected officials again a 401k and SS should be good enough for one if it is good enough for we the people.
Many here will be working on a presentation that all can take to their own legislator and present it to them - that we expect this to be enacted as it is - the only way to restore Freedom and Liberty. If they cannot support then we must ask them for their alternate plan, for the current path leads to a Dictatorship after the nation goes into hyperinflation, making our currency worthless by letting them print enough to pay off all debts.
The time is now we will succeed as a group or we shall surely fail individually. Just as the Founders said - we might hang together but we will surely hang individually.
As we all know the Federal government - Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary have not followed the Constitution from day one – Washington - the National Bank, Adams - the Alien and Sedition act, Jefferson the Louisiana purchase - the court cases of Marbury V Madison and McCullough V Maryland both were used by the Courts to grant themselves powers that exceeded the limits of Article III. So, they have now gone so far as to just rub it in our faces as did Obama in the "RECESS" appointments that the SCOTUS has now ruled were unconstitutional. So are all the Regulations and rules they had promulgated!
Most State Representatives are well aware of the Federal government using the Supremacy clause to force [via Courts] the State to act in a certain manner. The Federal government then bribes us with money like education funds for them to control our schools, the same with game management, fishing rules, farming rules, development rules, employment rules, wages paid for work, health care insurance, - if the State takes one dime they have agreed and now are contracted to do the wishes of the Federal government. Look at highways, airports and even railroads, all controlled in DC.
The local elected officials all know these problems but are hesitant to start a fight as they do not want to lose the Federal assistance money for sewer and water systems plus all the previously mentioned items. See we cannot vote new people to DC and get out of the problems - we have tried that for 50 years and we have failed to even alter the direction. As Einstein said: Continuing to repeat over and over for decades expecting a different result is a form of insanity.
Learn about how Article V can be used by the 38+ State legislatures to save the REPUBLIC. It is really not that complicated. We the People have a lot of help already in place - keep in mind that 28 States sued over the Constitutionality of Obamacare. There are 6 or 8 other States that have separate actions in the courts as we speak. So, if we the people bring pressure and support to the current legislature we can bring the corrections into the world of reality. Yes - it will cause a lot of disruption but those issues can be worked out - Each State must pay its share of the national debt and the cost of the military but the States would be in control as they have the money in hand, not the Federal government.
The savings by eliminating the duplication, thousands of agencies and sub-agencies will save trillions over the next 10 years. It will eliminate the high price of government pensions - let them participate in 401Ks and SS like the citizens. Eliminate special pensions for elected officials again a 401k and SS should be good enough for one if it is good enough for we the people.
Many here will be working on a presentation that all can take to their own legislator and present it to them - that we expect this to be enacted as it is - the only way to restore Freedom and Liberty. If they cannot support then we must ask them for their alternate plan, for the current path leads to a Dictatorship after the nation goes into hyperinflation, making our currency worthless by letting them print enough to pay off all debts.
The time is now we will succeed as a group or we shall surely fail individually. Just as the Founders said - we might hang together but we will surely hang individually.
America Urgently Needs State-Proposed Article V Constitutional Amendments
The Framers anticipated that the U.S. Constitution would need to be amended from time to time, what James Madison referred to as “to originate the amendment of errors.” They also recognized that the States would need the authority to restrain a power-hungry federal government and solve problems that Washington could not or would not address. For example, the federal government has been unwilling to stop their historic deficit spending, which is more than double their revenues. Our ballooning $14 Trillion national debt and borrowing is increasing by $4 Billion per day, or $13,200 per taxpayer per year! See our latest nation's debt totals at the U.S. Debt Clock.
Article V provides both Congress and the States with the exact same authority: to ‘propose’ new amendments. This limited authority to propose amendments should not be confused with a ‘Constitutional Convention,’ of which no mention, process or mechanism exists within the U.S. Constitution. There are those who have unfounded fears and oppose the legitimate use of Article V authority by the States. But is Congress somehow more trustworthy for proposing amendments than our State legislatures? By limiting its scope, a runaway convention is very unlikely and avoidable. Additionally, the ratification process and our system of checks and balances protect the Constitution from abuse by the amendment process.
The long historical use of an Article V type authority can be traced back as far as seventeenth-century England. Today's use of Article V authority by the States is endorsed by such Constitutional scholars as Professor Rob Natelson [http://constitution.i2i.org/about/](Independence Institute), Nick Dranias [http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/expert/109] (Goldwater Institute), Professor Randy Barnett [http://www.randybarnett.com/] (Georgetown University Law Center) and Russell L. Caplan (author of Constitutional Brinksmanship [http://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Brinksmanship-Amending-Constitution-Convention/dp/019505573X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1291767635&sr=8-1-catcorr].) Even our Founders encouraged Article V use by the States:
James Madison, in Federalist No. 43, wrote about this important Article V authority, equally shared between Congress and the States, that should be used to correct ‘errors’ in our government and Constitution “It, moreover, equally enables the general and the State governments to originate the amendment of errors, as they may be pointed out by the experience on one side, or on the other.”
Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist No. 85, wrote about how State legislatures should be ‘trusted’ to hold back an out-of-control central government “We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”
John Dickinson, in the “Fabius” [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php?title=2069&chapter=156153&layout=html&Itemid=27] essays, warned the States about negative consequences if they ‘did not’ use their authority to restrain an overbearing federal government “It will be their own faults, if the several States suffer the federal sovereignty to interfere in the things of their respective jurisdictions.”
Throughout our nation's history, the States have never exercised their Article V authority to meet in a convention for proposing and approving an amendment. Only Congress has proposed and forwarded amendments to the States for ratification. But other than the repeal of Prohibition, [http://www.albany.edu/~wm731882/21st_amendment_final.html] Congress has not submitted an amendment to curb its own expanding power and authority since 1789 when it sent the Bill of Rights to the States for ratification.Congress will not reform itself. It is up to the States and We the People to repair our out-of-control government and to restore our Constitutional Republic.
Some Proposed New Constitutional Amendments, other than our own 28th, being considered that you may wish to investigate:
The National Debt Relief Amendment: “An increase in the federal debt requires approval from a majority of the legislatures of the separate States.” [http://www.restoringfreedom.org/]
The Repeal Amendment: "Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed." [http://www.repealamendment.org/]
The Vote On Taxes Amendment [http://www.voteontaxes.com/home.html]
America's Freedom Amendments [http://www.10amendments.org/]
Other links worth visiting: Terrific Article V Videos, [http://www.restoringfreedom.org/faqs-2] Runaway Convention?, [http://constitution.i2i.org/2010/11/26/was-the-constitutional-convention-a-%E2%80%9Crunaway%E2%80%9D/] Ryan Roadmap, [http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/] A.L.E.C. [http://www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home]
Please Help us personally meet with all fifty State legislatures and provide them with the needed leadership, to inform them about the Article V procedures, and to guide them through the processes of applying to Congress for a Convention and proposing and ratifying new amendments.
Also, please contact your State Representatives and ask them to support an:
"Application to Congress for a Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments"
Let's Reclaim Our Liberties, Restore Our Republic and Make History Together! Laus Deo
http://www.reclaimliberty.us/
Article V provides both Congress and the States with the exact same authority: to ‘propose’ new amendments. This limited authority to propose amendments should not be confused with a ‘Constitutional Convention,’ of which no mention, process or mechanism exists within the U.S. Constitution. There are those who have unfounded fears and oppose the legitimate use of Article V authority by the States. But is Congress somehow more trustworthy for proposing amendments than our State legislatures? By limiting its scope, a runaway convention is very unlikely and avoidable. Additionally, the ratification process and our system of checks and balances protect the Constitution from abuse by the amendment process.
The long historical use of an Article V type authority can be traced back as far as seventeenth-century England. Today's use of Article V authority by the States is endorsed by such Constitutional scholars as Professor Rob Natelson [http://constitution.i2i.org/about/](Independence Institute), Nick Dranias [http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/expert/109] (Goldwater Institute), Professor Randy Barnett [http://www.randybarnett.com/] (Georgetown University Law Center) and Russell L. Caplan (author of Constitutional Brinksmanship [http://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Brinksmanship-Amending-Constitution-Convention/dp/019505573X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1291767635&sr=8-1-catcorr].) Even our Founders encouraged Article V use by the States:
James Madison, in Federalist No. 43, wrote about this important Article V authority, equally shared between Congress and the States, that should be used to correct ‘errors’ in our government and Constitution “It, moreover, equally enables the general and the State governments to originate the amendment of errors, as they may be pointed out by the experience on one side, or on the other.”
Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist No. 85, wrote about how State legislatures should be ‘trusted’ to hold back an out-of-control central government “We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”
John Dickinson, in the “Fabius” [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php?title=2069&chapter=156153&layout=html&Itemid=27] essays, warned the States about negative consequences if they ‘did not’ use their authority to restrain an overbearing federal government “It will be their own faults, if the several States suffer the federal sovereignty to interfere in the things of their respective jurisdictions.”
Throughout our nation's history, the States have never exercised their Article V authority to meet in a convention for proposing and approving an amendment. Only Congress has proposed and forwarded amendments to the States for ratification. But other than the repeal of Prohibition, [http://www.albany.edu/~wm731882/21st_amendment_final.html] Congress has not submitted an amendment to curb its own expanding power and authority since 1789 when it sent the Bill of Rights to the States for ratification.Congress will not reform itself. It is up to the States and We the People to repair our out-of-control government and to restore our Constitutional Republic.
Some Proposed New Constitutional Amendments, other than our own 28th, being considered that you may wish to investigate:
The National Debt Relief Amendment: “An increase in the federal debt requires approval from a majority of the legislatures of the separate States.” [http://www.restoringfreedom.org/]
The Repeal Amendment: "Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed." [http://www.repealamendment.org/]
The Vote On Taxes Amendment [http://www.voteontaxes.com/home.html]
America's Freedom Amendments [http://www.10amendments.org/]
Other links worth visiting: Terrific Article V Videos, [http://www.restoringfreedom.org/faqs-2] Runaway Convention?, [http://constitution.i2i.org/2010/11/26/was-the-constitutional-convention-a-%E2%80%9Crunaway%E2%80%9D/] Ryan Roadmap, [http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/] A.L.E.C. [http://www.alec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home]
Please Help us personally meet with all fifty State legislatures and provide them with the needed leadership, to inform them about the Article V procedures, and to guide them through the processes of applying to Congress for a Convention and proposing and ratifying new amendments.
Also, please contact your State Representatives and ask them to support an:
"Application to Congress for a Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments"
Let's Reclaim Our Liberties, Restore Our Republic and Make History Together! Laus Deo
http://www.reclaimliberty.us/
|
Madison being misread (on an amendments convention)
January 18, 2011 by Rob Natelson Filed under: All Postings, Article V Convention Sometimes even friends of the Constitution misinterpret the document or the history surrounding it. Throughout the country right now, state lawmakers are advancing constitutional amendments to restrain federal power and federal spending. Because they know that Congress will never propose amendments to restrain itself (2/3 of both the Senate and House would have to approve them), state lawmakers are using the Constitution’s other amendment route – state application, followed by an interstate drafting committee (which the Constitution calls a “convention for proposing amendments”), followed by ratification by 3/4 of the states. |
To be absolutely clear...we do not advocate a constitutional convention.
We propose an Article V amendment convention...specific and defined agenda...limited scope...established as process by the Founders stated in the U.S. Constitution.
THERE IS MUCH CON/CON DEBATE OUT THERE AND RUNAWAY CONVENTION MYTHOLOGY...LET US BEGIN TO ADDRESS IT.
PREPARED BY NICK DRANIAS
DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT
GOLDWATER INSTITUTE
10 FACTS TO REBUTT THE MYTHOLOGY OF A RUNAWAY CONVENTION
1. ARTICLE V does not authorize a constitutional convention; it authorizes a convention for proposing specific amendments.
2. When the Founders drafted the U.S. Constitution in 1787, they specifically rejected the language for Article V that would have allowed the states to later call for an open convention.
3. Thirty eight (38) states must ratify any proposal from an amendments convention, requiring a broad consensus that makes sure the amendments convention cannot "runaway".
4. The limited scope of an amendments convention is underscored by the fact that it specifically says amendments cannot alter the equal number of votes for each state in the U.S. Senate without the consent of the affected state. This established that an Article V convention couldn't simply re-write the entire Constitution.
5. The states define the agenda of an amendments convention through their application for the convention and through the commission of the delegates. Amendments conventions can be limited to specific topics.
6. The Constitution was sold by the Founders to the ratifying states on the basis that they retained their ultimate authority over the federal government through their Article V amendment powers.
James Madison in Federalist No. 43 specifically argued that the states should use the power to correct the errors in the Constitution.
Alexander Hamilton in the "final argument" of the Federalist Papers, in Federalist No. 85, said the amendment process was the means by which the states would rein in an out-of-control federal government.
One cannot take the Constitution seriously and contend that Article V was not meant to be used. It is critical and "deal closing" element of the balance of power created by the Constitution.
7. There is ZERO PRECEDENT that any convention of the states has ever "runaway" from its assigned agenda. There have been 12 interstate conventions in the history of our country. ALL OF THEM stayed within their stated agenda. Even the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was not convened to "amend" the Articles of Confederation, but to "revise" and "alter" the Articles to establish an effective national government. This was fully consistent with the Article of Confederation because the Article authorized alterations- a term that had revolutionary significance because it echoed the language of the Declaration of Independence. The broad purpose of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was specifically mentioned in the call of Congress and in nearly all of the commissions for the delegates for each state. The 1787 convention did not runaway at all; it did what it was charged to do-like all interstate conventions preceding it.
8. The procedures for conducting an amendments convention are similar to Congress' long-established rule-making powers. Constitutional text, language and custom make clear that Congress calls the convention, setting a time and location; state appoint delegates by way of resolutions and commissions (or general law); delegates initially vote as states at the convention; and majority votes decide what amendments are proposed for ratification. An amendments convention is simply an interstate task force.
9. The limited scope of an amendments convention is similar to that of state ratification conventions that are also authorized in Article V, but no one worries about a ratification convention "running away" even though such a convention does make law.
10. An amendments convention, because it only proposes amendments and does not make law, is not an effective vehicle for staging a government take-over.
The Goldwater Institute was established in1988 as an independent, non-partisan public policy research organization. Through policy studies and community outreach, the Goldwater Institute broadens public policy discussions to allow consideration of the policies consistent with the Founding Principles-limited government, economic freedom, and individual responsibility.
We propose an Article V amendment convention...specific and defined agenda...limited scope...established as process by the Founders stated in the U.S. Constitution.
THERE IS MUCH CON/CON DEBATE OUT THERE AND RUNAWAY CONVENTION MYTHOLOGY...LET US BEGIN TO ADDRESS IT.
PREPARED BY NICK DRANIAS
DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT
GOLDWATER INSTITUTE
10 FACTS TO REBUTT THE MYTHOLOGY OF A RUNAWAY CONVENTION
1. ARTICLE V does not authorize a constitutional convention; it authorizes a convention for proposing specific amendments.
2. When the Founders drafted the U.S. Constitution in 1787, they specifically rejected the language for Article V that would have allowed the states to later call for an open convention.
3. Thirty eight (38) states must ratify any proposal from an amendments convention, requiring a broad consensus that makes sure the amendments convention cannot "runaway".
4. The limited scope of an amendments convention is underscored by the fact that it specifically says amendments cannot alter the equal number of votes for each state in the U.S. Senate without the consent of the affected state. This established that an Article V convention couldn't simply re-write the entire Constitution.
5. The states define the agenda of an amendments convention through their application for the convention and through the commission of the delegates. Amendments conventions can be limited to specific topics.
6. The Constitution was sold by the Founders to the ratifying states on the basis that they retained their ultimate authority over the federal government through their Article V amendment powers.
James Madison in Federalist No. 43 specifically argued that the states should use the power to correct the errors in the Constitution.
Alexander Hamilton in the "final argument" of the Federalist Papers, in Federalist No. 85, said the amendment process was the means by which the states would rein in an out-of-control federal government.
One cannot take the Constitution seriously and contend that Article V was not meant to be used. It is critical and "deal closing" element of the balance of power created by the Constitution.
7. There is ZERO PRECEDENT that any convention of the states has ever "runaway" from its assigned agenda. There have been 12 interstate conventions in the history of our country. ALL OF THEM stayed within their stated agenda. Even the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was not convened to "amend" the Articles of Confederation, but to "revise" and "alter" the Articles to establish an effective national government. This was fully consistent with the Article of Confederation because the Article authorized alterations- a term that had revolutionary significance because it echoed the language of the Declaration of Independence. The broad purpose of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was specifically mentioned in the call of Congress and in nearly all of the commissions for the delegates for each state. The 1787 convention did not runaway at all; it did what it was charged to do-like all interstate conventions preceding it.
8. The procedures for conducting an amendments convention are similar to Congress' long-established rule-making powers. Constitutional text, language and custom make clear that Congress calls the convention, setting a time and location; state appoint delegates by way of resolutions and commissions (or general law); delegates initially vote as states at the convention; and majority votes decide what amendments are proposed for ratification. An amendments convention is simply an interstate task force.
9. The limited scope of an amendments convention is similar to that of state ratification conventions that are also authorized in Article V, but no one worries about a ratification convention "running away" even though such a convention does make law.
10. An amendments convention, because it only proposes amendments and does not make law, is not an effective vehicle for staging a government take-over.
The Goldwater Institute was established in1988 as an independent, non-partisan public policy research organization. Through policy studies and community outreach, the Goldwater Institute broadens public policy discussions to allow consideration of the policies consistent with the Founding Principles-limited government, economic freedom, and individual responsibility.
An Article V amendment process does not have to be a convention.
There is a lot of misinformation out there regarding a State Legislature of 38 States voting in a majority in both State houses to support an amendment - any amendment that 38+ can agree and pass - it is then sent to the Congress or to a clerk for being sent to the many 50 States for ratification - upon the ratification of the 38th State that amendment will become the law of the land.
Now there is no CONVENTION - and that word in 1828 meant a meeting of two or more people not what the JBS and Eagle Forum are putting out. These conservative organizations fighting restoring the original Constitutional Republics is baffling to say the least . . they even go so far as to quote the Chief Justice that approved Roe V Wade ?????
All publications they have put out are 100% speculation and Opinion which in the opinions of many Constitutional scholars are just not correct. spend some time in the site below and study the issue it is the largest FREE Constitutional law - American History site on the web. NO cookies, no ads, no tracking just the presentations and arguments from as many sides as information presents. Keep in mind that all items in the Constitution are limits on the Federal government or the State governments - all rights are retained [except as changed by the 14th amendment] in the tenth amendment to the States and then the people. the Federal government can only do what is contained within the four corners of the Constitution and must stay in the limits of the Article I section 8 enumerated powers.
Visit and join in the fight to restore States rights and powers over the Federal Government and the Courts. Print the brochure and make copies for all your local and State elected officials - get involved with saving and Keeping the REPUBLIC as Franklin warned. Take the money and the power from DC and the lobbyist army will fade into the pages of history - failed Progressive controls will leave our industries and schools to our local government and our State Legislatures to make laws and rule for WE THE PEOPLE - this will restore Freedom and Liberty to us all.
Founders said that the Federal government should be small, limited powers and weak; and the States should be strong and unlimited. Will you fight so we can leave the children of the future Free and with the Liberties given by our Creator? Let us roll.
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/
Now there is no CONVENTION - and that word in 1828 meant a meeting of two or more people not what the JBS and Eagle Forum are putting out. These conservative organizations fighting restoring the original Constitutional Republics is baffling to say the least . . they even go so far as to quote the Chief Justice that approved Roe V Wade ?????
All publications they have put out are 100% speculation and Opinion which in the opinions of many Constitutional scholars are just not correct. spend some time in the site below and study the issue it is the largest FREE Constitutional law - American History site on the web. NO cookies, no ads, no tracking just the presentations and arguments from as many sides as information presents. Keep in mind that all items in the Constitution are limits on the Federal government or the State governments - all rights are retained [except as changed by the 14th amendment] in the tenth amendment to the States and then the people. the Federal government can only do what is contained within the four corners of the Constitution and must stay in the limits of the Article I section 8 enumerated powers.
Visit and join in the fight to restore States rights and powers over the Federal Government and the Courts. Print the brochure and make copies for all your local and State elected officials - get involved with saving and Keeping the REPUBLIC as Franklin warned. Take the money and the power from DC and the lobbyist army will fade into the pages of history - failed Progressive controls will leave our industries and schools to our local government and our State Legislatures to make laws and rule for WE THE PEOPLE - this will restore Freedom and Liberty to us all.
Founders said that the Federal government should be small, limited powers and weak; and the States should be strong and unlimited. Will you fight so we can leave the children of the future Free and with the Liberties given by our Creator? Let us roll.
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/
