There appears to be a movement afoot in the land to petition for an Article Five constitutional convention to amend the constitution once again. The Amendment desired is one which would allow the States, by a two/thirds vote - to repeal congressional acts found to be egregious by the individual states. The Obamacare Health Bill appears to be the catalyst for this call to action.
As you folks know, Article Five of the Constitution grants the States, if passed by three fourths of the individual state legislatures, the right to demand a constitutional convention. Many of the States, watching congress and the POTUS dissembling the Tenth Amendment and reducing the rights of the several states more and more each session, would like to end this ride down the slippery slope to total federalism.
Although I would like to see such an amendment, any call for a convention to amend our constitution just scares the pee-waddling-dee out of this ole' boy. I trust those fellers that have been feeding at the gob'mint trough all these years about as much as I believe that Obamanation has the best interest of the USA in his pointy little head.
Although the Convention would be restricted to the amendment proposed by the Article Five petition, I have absolute NO faith that some unwelcome finagling wouldn't occur. Under the guise of tit for tat, or sausage making as they laughingly call it inside the beltway.
I would suggest that if thirty-four of the States are unhappy with legislation being promulgated by THEIR representatives in the Congress...... perhaps they might ought to consider recalling those congressmen and senators and replacing them with representatives who DO represent needs and wants of the states and the constituents therein. That would be great for all of us, and I got a short list of Texas Congressmen I would willingly add to that list --- including my own!
This is perfectly justified case of 'killing the messenger' when you don't like the message he (she) brings back home at the end of the legislative session.
What do you think?
Click here for more background on this topic.
2 comments:
The author's fears are groundless as demonstrated by the fact he doesn't even quote Article V correctly. It requires two thirds of the states not three fourths as he states to cause a convention call. How can anyone really take faith in something says when they can't get their basic facts straight?
The facts are the states have applied in overwhelming numbers for a convention call already. See www.foavc.org. There is no requirement for same subject in Article V meaning his statement the states have apply for the same subject is incorrect. The author bases his fear on misinformation and expects others to do the same. He should be ignored.
Good point Bill, until you started obfuscating with the 'same subject' topic. You lost me there.
The exact wording of Article V is:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem in necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States. or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress. [......]"
It's nice to know I'm not out here on this prairie by myself.
BTW, I think the only fear I expressed was the thought of even having a constitutional convention. Shall I take it that you favor having one? And if so, to propose what changes?
Thanks for the comments.....
Post a Comment