Posted on Dec 5, 2014
Would you support an Article 5 Convention of the States?
5.82K
45
29
3
3
0
Mark Levin - ALEC 2014 States and Nation Policy Summit
For more information about ALEC, please visit http://www.alec.org/. For more information on Article V Conventions, see the ALEC Article V Handbook, http://ww...
Would you support an Article 5 Convention of the States, not a Constitutional Convention, an Article 5 Convention of the States? If you would what amendment would be most important to you and why?
Posted in these groups: 
Constitution
Constitution
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 11
4
4
0
I think it would be a free for all, but an interesting exercise to put some issues on the table. The founders put this in the Constitution for a reason - to prevent a tyrannical federal government from usurping the states. I think the country would benefit from putting some of the ideas on the table: Balanced Budget Amendment and Term Limits both come to mind, but I'm sure there are others worthy of consideration.
I think it would capture the country's attention, and maybe just give citizen a civics lesson that is sorely needed.
No need to worry about anything crazy happening because it still requires a 3/4 vote of state legislatures to get an amendment passed. I think it would be fascinating.
I think it would capture the country's attention, and maybe just give citizen a civics lesson that is sorely needed.
No need to worry about anything crazy happening because it still requires a 3/4 vote of state legislatures to get an amendment passed. I think it would be fascinating.
(4)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
The House of Representatives has to convene the Constitutional Convention and set parameters. Most likely that would be a circus in and of itself. Once convened, the representatives of the states to the sausage-making, and Congress gets out of the way with no further role (other than bellyache about leaked items they don't like).
I think that if it happened, you would see mud-slinging and negativity on a scale never before seen, as the political establishment is both cut out of the process and potentially directly threatened by it.
I think that if it happened, you would see mud-slinging and negativity on a scale never before seen, as the political establishment is both cut out of the process and potentially directly threatened by it.
(0)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see) The Article 5 process was added as a safeguard when the Federal Legislature would not adhere to Federalism and the 10th Amendments. The language states "OR". This is not a Constitutional Convention which is how the US Constitution was brought into being. The addition of the Bill of Rights was a Convention of the States to shore up federalism. I believe all states have issues with the current overreach in one shape or another.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, OR, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States"
Levin sums it up very well and explains why this isn't a ConCon. There was mud slinging during the debates of the Bill of Rights also. There will always be animosity as long as factions/parties are more interested in power and control over freedom and liberty.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, OR, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States"
Levin sums it up very well and explains why this isn't a ConCon. There was mud slinging during the debates of the Bill of Rights also. There will always be animosity as long as factions/parties are more interested in power and control over freedom and liberty.
The Liberty Amendments: Mark R. Levin: 9781451606324: Amazon.com: Books
The Liberty Amendments [Mark R. Levin] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. In his #1 bestsellers Liberty and Tyranny and Ameritopia, Mark R. Levin has all but predicted the current assault on our individual liberties
(0)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
PO1 J D Maxim Fortunately there are states that are getting involved. Through some grassroots efforts we can all contact our state legislatures and ask them to get involved.
The Case for a Convention of States
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I believe the civil war should have settled the issue of supremacy between the Federal government and the states... while all government is rife with greed and corruption, my experience has shown that State government is far more corrupt and self serving than Federal government which still gets a fair amount of scrutiny by the fourth estate.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
1. I believe it is article 17( election of senators) repeal.
2. Balance budget
3. Term limits.
That is a good beginning
2. Balance budget
3. Term limits.
That is a good beginning
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
http://www.conventionofstates.com/
1) Balanced budget
2) Term limits
3) Reduction of power
4) Remove lobbying/corporate sponsors
I think items 1 & 2 in my list could be worded in such a way that any House Member, through his voting, shows that s/he has actively worked towards debt reduction and a balanced budget if they want a 2nd term. Also, once a 2nd term is complete they are no longer eligible for *any* position in the 3 branches of our government. (Legislative/Judicial/Executive)
There are very few things enumerated to the Federal Government; the rest being left to the States. It is time to get the Federal level out of those areas they never had rights to be in.
The political scene today is not For The People! It is who can get the most cash from the most lobbyists and corporations for favors, laws (in corporate favor), etc.
1) Balanced budget
2) Term limits
3) Reduction of power
4) Remove lobbying/corporate sponsors
I think items 1 & 2 in my list could be worded in such a way that any House Member, through his voting, shows that s/he has actively worked towards debt reduction and a balanced budget if they want a 2nd term. Also, once a 2nd term is complete they are no longer eligible for *any* position in the 3 branches of our government. (Legislative/Judicial/Executive)
There are very few things enumerated to the Federal Government; the rest being left to the States. It is time to get the Federal level out of those areas they never had rights to be in.
The political scene today is not For The People! It is who can get the most cash from the most lobbyists and corporations for favors, laws (in corporate favor), etc.
Article V offers the only constitutional solution as big as the problem. Together, we can end federal overreach.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
As long as it is confined to specific amendments and follow the procedures for enactment, yes. First up would be the 14th amendment, that confers citizenship an anyone born inside the USA boundaries. It is one of the most abused amendment of them all, with the possible exception of the 10th, but that one is probably one of the most important and, if anything reinforced.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Eliminate the electoral college.
Anything possible to eliminate gerrymandering districts
Update the fourth and fifth amendments to include electronic media
Anything possible to eliminate gerrymandering districts
Update the fourth and fifth amendments to include electronic media
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Given that our government is primarily influenced by banks, massive multinational corporations and the super wealthy, I'm inclined to believe that any changes we might make to the constitution would not be in the interests of the common people.
(1)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
The primary Amendments being proposed are term limits on the congress and a balanced budget amendment. Term limits would be the most important in my opinion, to remove the influence from "career" politicians.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I'm not sure that term limits will make politicians any less corrupt/dependent on financing from Wall Street. I also blame a lot of the dysfunction in congress on ideologues who haven't yet learned that compromise is necessary.
I'm also distrustful of balanced budget amendments, while a balanced budget is laudable... in times of war and/or economic crisis, the government shouldn't have thier hands tied.
I'm also distrustful of balanced budget amendments, while a balanced budget is laudable... in times of war and/or economic crisis, the government shouldn't have thier hands tied.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
MSG (Join to see)
The Article Five Solution – The Absurdity of Inaction
This is the second installment in a five-part series on Article Five of the U.S. Consitution. Please check back every day this week for new content and click here for the entire series. – Far and away, fear is the most common rationale among opponents of Article...
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
see following link that gives reasons why we vets truly need to support a Convention of States to rein in the power and size of the federal government.
https://patriotpost.us/commentary/28771
https://patriotpost.us/commentary/28771
A Critical Mission for America’s Military Veterans
America’s military veterans are men and women who served in all branches of the armed forces. They are a special group of approximately 21 million people who share a common bond: their oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and...
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I would have to be in favor of two:
1. "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
2. Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political
equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral
process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits
on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to
influence elections.
Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement
and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may
distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other
artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such
entities from spending money to influence elections.
Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant
Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the
press.''
1. "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
2. Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political
equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral
process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits
on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to
influence elections.
Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement
and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may
distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other
artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such
entities from spending money to influence elections.
Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant
Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the
press.''
(1)
(0)
PO2 Jonathan Scharff
Cpl (Join to see) maybe we could repeal the 17th in a modified way...still allowing a general election but using a state electoral college run by the state legislation. Checks and balances.
(0)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
An election by the states would still be granted under the 10th Amendment. States still set up there own election rules under federalism. However, if the states did not believe the senators represented state interests, they would have the option of replacing them. When McCain was censured by the Arizona electorate, he could have been replaced by the state.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Michael Scharff
What do you intend by: " including by prohibiting such
entities from spending money to influence elections." Based on this, congress could prohibit you from giving money to a candidate while allowing someone else to give. Or allow some companies or entities to give while restricting others. Plus, this has already been addressed by the supreme court.
I for one am not for term limits... we already have them... in my district we voted out our representative in a primary a few years ago and voted in another that won in the general election (Trey Gowdy).
entities from spending money to influence elections." Based on this, congress could prohibit you from giving money to a candidate while allowing someone else to give. Or allow some companies or entities to give while restricting others. Plus, this has already been addressed by the supreme court.
I for one am not for term limits... we already have them... in my district we voted out our representative in a primary a few years ago and voted in another that won in the general election (Trey Gowdy).
(0)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
Term limits does not limit politicians so much as it limits stupid voters. I think MAJ Michael Scharff has it right on that.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
In theory I love this concept, however I am afraid to see what may come out of this. With those that dictate how the policy actually operates today, as well as the perceptions of the majority of the voting public this may turn out with a worse environment than we currently have.
It is a wonderful thing to have access to, but could easily backfire as well.
It is a wonderful thing to have access to, but could easily backfire as well.
(0)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
To allay the fears of a runaway convention, the only thing I can suggest is to read Mark Levin's book, The Liberty Amendments. He identifies the difference between a ConCon and an Article 5 Convention of the States. He lays out the pros and addresses the fears of a runaway convention as well as detailing proposed amendments and the reasons for the amendments.
(1)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
CPT Zachary Brooks Here is another article posted on the Convention of the States web site.
http://www.conventionofstates.com/top_10_reasons_why_runaway_convention_myth
http://www.conventionofstates.com/top_10_reasons_why_runaway_convention_myth
Top 10 reasons why the idea of a "runaway convention" is a myth
The fear of a runaway convention is unfounded -- here's why.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google