Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Minuteman on April 30, 2012 at 6:14am

Keith,, that site link above goes to the home page and even though i checked out the other pages i could not find the online convention and also the click here links in your thread are not working. I would really like to check this stuff out. Thank you for the posting on this subject and anything you can do to help out with those click here links and maybe a direct link to that convention page would be nice.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Bauer on May 25, 2012 at 1:31pm

I suspect Mr. Broaders that it has been you(correct me if I am wrong) who has been sending me emails from the WRAM site regarding a Constitutional Convention over the past few weeks as I have been active in this push for quite some time. It would be nice though if I could reply as there is a do-not-reply header at the top of these received emails, so I cannot do so. However, your knowledge about the logistics of proposing amendments is faulty.

That said, The Constitution outlines 2 methods of proposing amendments. One is via the state legislatures AND the Congress. The other is by a National Constitutional Convention as outlined in Article V. The latter is not done via a "Clearinghouse"(Convention USA), but by an actual Convention authorized by the state legislatures. Bottom line---you are either going to follow the Constitution or you aren't. I suggest you protect yourself as well as other Convention supporters in the LEGAL sense by following the Constitution. Else you may find yourself looking at subversion or sedition charges at some point. If you want a Convention, the correct way to go about it is to lobby your state legislators first. They HAVE to authorize it.( Remember, we live in a REPRESENTATIVE republic, not a direct democracy). It seems very simple, but for some unknown reason, many Convention proponents just don't seem capable of it.

http://www.callaconvention.org

http://www.conconcon.org

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NationalConstitutionalConvention06

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chancy Yardbird on May 25, 2012 at 2:01pm

Article V of the Uninted States Constitution:

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, 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 the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate

There are volumes writen about what this means to each and every state because each and every state differs in their own State constitutions and laws that must be followed to proceed. It is then unwise to assume that a one shoe fits all approch can get what a certain body of peoples desire.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Bauer on May 25, 2012 at 2:34pm

Your mixing apples and oranges here, Chancy. State Constitutions and the Federal Constitution are two separate things. It should also be pointed out that almost all states themselves have constitutional convention provisions as part of their state constitutions, but these are for fixing problems within the STATE itself. The Constitutional Convention provision within the Federal Constitution was designed for remedying NATIONAL problems. The Federal Constitution is very specific in the steps that must be taken to call a National Convention. 2/3rds of the states have to call for one. Congress then issues the call. When the Convention occurs, any amendment coming out of it has to either be approved by 3/4 of the states. Congress specifies if this approval is done by state conventions or the state legislatures themselves. The Founders erred on 2 accounts here in my view. 1) They should have left Congress out of it altogether because a Convention is utilzed by and large when Congress itself fails to do its job 2) The second area in which they erred is not specifying how delegates to the Convention are chosen. However, as a Federal Convention is CLEARLY a state legislature driven process, one would assume that the delegates would either be state legislators themselves, those chosen by them, or perhaps those elected at the state level in special elections.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chancy Yardbird on May 25, 2012 at 2:45pm

You're very right, Eric. The differing constitutions all are like a fruit cocktail. Each establishes the authority that THEIR state legislators have while representing the peoples of their state. Within their state house and senate. AND the authority given to the US senate Repreesentatives (different ) elected by people of their State. I might add that it's my opinion that each state has laws estblished that are designed to keep a contitution convention from being loaded up by a particular party or group or interest. For good reason.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Bauer on May 25, 2012 at 2:41pm

I just wanted to add that I applaud Mr. Broaders activism and a Clearinghouse for Convention amendment proposals does have its use in the sense that it can determine what the American people as a whole deem important at this time. However, it must be made clear that this would be a private endeavor and in no way constitutes any legal/binding action. Whatever proposals come out of this "Convention" should be forwarded to the appropriate state legislators.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chancy Yardbird on May 25, 2012 at 3:07pm

Eric, the political party conventions do a lot of exactly what you're proposing. The delegates to those conventions also form the party platforms and through several processes push legislation and ammendment proposals forward. How those proposals are taken and ran with by the successful candidates is what needs a lot of effort to correct. IMHO.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Bauer on May 25, 2012 at 3:21pm

Well it's been my obeservation that the higher ups in the parties often ignore the platform and follow their own agendas. This has notoriously been the case with the Republican Party through the years and one of the main reasons the Tea Party has emerged in my view. Conservatives were thrown a bone in helping to formulate party platform planks only to see them largely ignored year after year after year after year.

The other thing you have to realize is that most of the people participating here are conservatives. I do know that many liberals now also want to see a Convention happen and are openly discussing it. Aside from that, the major political parties today though have one overriding objective and that is the retention of power. Legislation is secondary and is viewed only as it pertains to their first objective. The national good has become secondary--not for all politicians, but for the majority at the federal level in my view. And if you're a maverick, tremendous pressure is brought to bear to get you to conform to party ideology. At this point, I don't see anything substantive coming out of any of the two main parties. You only need to see the continued gridlock in D.C. to realize that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chancy Yardbird on May 25, 2012 at 3:53pm

Well, I think we probably agree that the best way to improve the political system is to participate in it. And to try to get candidates to keep to their stated goals and the over all desires of their electors. Those who promise the most also seem to negotiate away the most of their electors ideals. WE THE PEOPLE can fix that or keep accepting the evils and sins like corruption and greed that causes it. THe sins of greed and corruption can NOT be defeated by the use of the sins of false accusations and envy. WE THE PEOPLE deserve what we demand..

• ▶ Reply