Con Con - How will it work?
Part of the dilemma and cause for confusion is that there are no guidelines. The last time a group of delegates got together in convention to amend our national governing document—the Articles of Confederation—they immediately scrapped the guidelines that were given to them, scrapped the entire document (the Articles), and wrote a new Constitution. They produced an excellent set of rules for government because they sought divine guidance for their work. It won’t likely be the Hand of God guiding a present-day convention.
Nobody (who’s talking, anyhow) knows who will decide the guidelines for an Article V convention. According to Publius Hulda, James Madison, for one, had grave concerns about the vagueness of the wording of the article.
James Kenneth Rogers argues in this Harvard Law article that the national congress has no power or authority in such a convention other than "calling" it.
This theory is comforting to those of us who fear Congressional control of a convention, BUT.
Phyllis Schlafly proposes another viewpoint in Is Article V in Our Future?
“If Congress ever decides to act, Article V gives Congress exclusive power to issue the "Call" for a convention to propose "amendments" (note the plural). The Call is the governing document which determines all the basic rules such as where and when a convention will be held, who is eligible to be a delegate (will current office-holders be eligible?), how delegates will be apportioned, how expenses will be paid and who will be the chairman.”
Publius Huldah’s article Straight Talk About An Article V Convention is chockfull of well-researched information and she has included links for verification and further study. Among the gems:
PH cites a Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report, dated April 11, 2014 which states that,
“First, Article V delegates important and exclusive authority over the amendment process to Congress…” (page 4)
“Second . . . Congress has traditionally laid claim to broad responsibilities in connection with a convention, including. . . (4) determining the number and selection process for its delegates; (5) setting internal convention procedures, including formulae for allocation of votes among the states;. . .”(page 4)
And much more, including on page 27,
“In the final analysis, the question what sort of convention?” is not likely to be resolved unless or until the 34-state threshold has been crossed and a convention assembles.”
To reveal the evil intentions of certain Con Con proponents,
PH talks about the “parental rights” amendment and shows how Michael Farris’ proposed amendment delegates power over children to the federal and State governments, and
PH demonstrates how six of Mark Levin’s so-called “liberty amendments” do the opposite of what he claims.
PH accuses the States of voluntarily surrendering their retained powers, and the natural rights of The People TO the federal government. She uses a Pew Report to show that States get from 20% (Alaska) to 45.3% (Mississippi) of their State budgets from the federal government.
Amazing article! Check it out.
Eagle Forum asks twenty very relevant questions about a Con Con, with the final one being this:
“20. If these questions cannot be answered (and they CANNOT!), then why would any state legislator even consider voting for such an uncertain event as an Article V Constitutional Convention?”
So, who has the authority to decide the rules for an Article V convention?
Nobody really knows; but you can bet that those with evil intentions are already conspiring to take control of the shindig and they likely have the rules all figured out and won’t be asking for your opinion. Well, you MIGHT possibly get to vote on the state’s delegates to the convention. How reassuring is that?—given that we feel manipulated, disenfranchised, excluded, snubbed, patronized and abused by the whole electoral process.
I agree with Eagle forum,
“. . . why would any state legislator even consider voting for such an uncertain event as an Article V Constitutional Convention?”
Nobody (who’s talking, anyhow) knows who will decide the guidelines for an Article V convention. According to Publius Hulda, James Madison, for one, had grave concerns about the vagueness of the wording of the article.
James Kenneth Rogers argues in this Harvard Law article that the national congress has no power or authority in such a convention other than "calling" it.
This theory is comforting to those of us who fear Congressional control of a convention, BUT.
Phyllis Schlafly proposes another viewpoint in Is Article V in Our Future?
“If Congress ever decides to act, Article V gives Congress exclusive power to issue the "Call" for a convention to propose "amendments" (note the plural). The Call is the governing document which determines all the basic rules such as where and when a convention will be held, who is eligible to be a delegate (will current office-holders be eligible?), how delegates will be apportioned, how expenses will be paid and who will be the chairman.”
Publius Huldah’s article Straight Talk About An Article V Convention is chockfull of well-researched information and she has included links for verification and further study. Among the gems:
PH cites a Congressional Research Service (CRS) Report, dated April 11, 2014 which states that,
“First, Article V delegates important and exclusive authority over the amendment process to Congress…” (page 4)
“Second . . . Congress has traditionally laid claim to broad responsibilities in connection with a convention, including. . . (4) determining the number and selection process for its delegates; (5) setting internal convention procedures, including formulae for allocation of votes among the states;. . .”(page 4)
And much more, including on page 27,
“In the final analysis, the question what sort of convention?” is not likely to be resolved unless or until the 34-state threshold has been crossed and a convention assembles.”
To reveal the evil intentions of certain Con Con proponents,
PH talks about the “parental rights” amendment and shows how Michael Farris’ proposed amendment delegates power over children to the federal and State governments, and
PH demonstrates how six of Mark Levin’s so-called “liberty amendments” do the opposite of what he claims.
PH accuses the States of voluntarily surrendering their retained powers, and the natural rights of The People TO the federal government. She uses a Pew Report to show that States get from 20% (Alaska) to 45.3% (Mississippi) of their State budgets from the federal government.
Amazing article! Check it out.
Eagle Forum asks twenty very relevant questions about a Con Con, with the final one being this:
“20. If these questions cannot be answered (and they CANNOT!), then why would any state legislator even consider voting for such an uncertain event as an Article V Constitutional Convention?”
So, who has the authority to decide the rules for an Article V convention?
Nobody really knows; but you can bet that those with evil intentions are already conspiring to take control of the shindig and they likely have the rules all figured out and won’t be asking for your opinion. Well, you MIGHT possibly get to vote on the state’s delegates to the convention. How reassuring is that?—given that we feel manipulated, disenfranchised, excluded, snubbed, patronized and abused by the whole electoral process.
I agree with Eagle forum,
“. . . why would any state legislator even consider voting for such an uncertain event as an Article V Constitutional Convention?”