FYI: Constitutional Convention

[Colonel Dan, SASS #24025]

I don’t normally telegraph the subjects of my upcoming articles but thought I’d post this on the Wire for information purposes due to a movement that’s cropped up recently.

 

The movement in question is one you may have seen already as its being pushed around the email circuit right now. My column on this topic however won’t be published until February ergo the SASS Wire post.

 

There’s a movement afoot to convene a Constitutional Convention for the purpose of adopting a 28th Amendment requiring that all members of Congress be subject to the same laws they pass for us.

 

Although the amendment sounds good, a constitutional convention is a very BAD idea and unnecessary to incorporate it into the Constitution. The only requirement to pass any amendment is for 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress and ¾ of the states to ratify it.

 

If a constitutional convention is convened, it leaves the entire document open for radical change—even to the point of a complete re-writing putting all our freedoms and protections in jeopardy! Don’t fall for this.

 

Push the amendment if you like but I strongly recommend against pushing for or supporting a constitutional convention to get it done.

 

Just some info from my saddle for you to chew on prior to getting involved…

[That Masked Man]

Good advice, Colonel.

 

As a fan of history it's worth pointing out that the last constitutional convention we had was arranged for the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation, but wound up rewriting the whole thing and resulted in the Constitution we have today.

 

So folks, the good Colonel is not just whistling Dixie here, what he warns of is exactly what happened the LAST time!!

 

Hi-Yo and Awaaaaaay,

That Masked Man

[el Gato Gordo - SASS #15162]

If a constitutional convention is convened, it leaves the entire document open for radical change—even to the point of a complete re-writing putting all our freedoms and protections in jeopardy! Don’t fall for this.

 

 

ABSOLUTELY! Not only would the Second Amendment be at risk, but other cherished liberties: freedom of speech, press & association; freedom OF religion (and FROM religion); protections for the accused, like Brian Aitken, against the overwhelming power of the State; privacy protections: search and seizure, interrogation.

 

ALL of our Constitutional guarantees are currently under attack, from both the Right and the Left.

 

A Constitutional Convention is a BAD idea ~ remember, when the delegates convened to correct deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation, they had NO AUTHORITY to create our current Constitution, but they did so despite their lack of authority. What might modern delegates, who seem to have no regard for limits, do to our liberties, perhaps in the name of security or safety?

 

Buena suerte,

eGG

[Captain Woodrow Cahill, SASS # 54363]

Let's see here ... the last time the progressive thinkers and social order tinkerers tampered with The Constitution we ended up with Prohibition. As I recall, that didn't work out too well.

 

If the move is to put Congress under the same rules as the rest of, pressure your legislator(s) to introduce or sponsor such a bill. If they do, good. If they won't, then there's a campaign issue for the next go-around.

[Big-un Bruce]

Would this mean a state like Texas could move forward with secession?

[Trailrider #896]

Howdy, Pards,

 

Aside from worries about personal things, health, money, safety, etc., the idea of a ConCon ABSOLUTELY SCARES THE DAWG OUT OF ME, for the reasons others have stated!

 

This is a bag of rattlesnakes that could destroy our rights and our country! ABSOLUTELY NO! ON A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!

 

Ride careful, Pards! Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty! Godspeed to those still in harm's way in the defense of Freedom everywhere! God Bless and Save the United States of America!

 

Your Pard,

[Adirondack Jack, SASS #53440]

What makes America? Many countries are "democracies"/ Many countries are "republics", several have a "constitution", and several are "federations". America is the only CONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL REPUBLIC. Lose that good piece of paper, ya got someting akin to say France, where the whole "republic" can be tossed out and re-formed at will (and has been several times).....

[Big-un Bruce]

Just read where our current cogress has the lowest approval rating ever recorded. So we're going to bring these people together, who can't even manage our budget, and have them convene for a constitutional convention?!

[Ghost, SASS #50125]

The Ghost supports Colonel Dan's stand against a Constitutional Convention to add an admendment. There is a strong progressive movement, surely socialistic if not communismtic, to change America by using the Constitution and Judicial Law against us. The United States Constitution says what it says.

 

Ghost

[MMJ#89586]

I believe our state government has tried this with the state constitution. Is it more common in state government?

[That Masked Man]

I believe our state government has tried this with the state constitution. Is it more common in state government?

 

YES. Here in Georgia, our state Constitution is only about a dozen years old or so, IIRC. We have state level Constitutional Amendments to vote on at almost every election!

[Hacker, SASS #55963]

<US Constitution Article V>

 

"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."

 

<End of Article V>

 

The question is can a convention legally rewrite the constitution.

More over can it do it by proposing amendments for that is it's sole authority.

 

And would all amendments be up or down collectively or as individual amendments.

Meaning could/would the states be able to vote selectively on each amendment.

 

It should also be noted that there are some limitations on what the amendments may do.

 

But before we get all panic struck it takes only 13 states to reject any amendment.

 

I too oppose a constitutional convention because the level of intellect and national integrity is not present in the legislatures of these 50 states.

[The O'Meara Himself]

I would go along with a constitutional convention if you could guarantee members of the same quality as those who wrote the first one. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams, etc. Offhand, I don't see many around.

 

The O'Meara, himself

[DocWard]

I would go along with a constitutional convention if you could guarantee members of the same quality as those who wrote the first one. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams, etc. Offhand, I don't see many around.

 

The O'Meara, himself

 

"Many?" I think you are being generous.

[Mean Matt McCord, SASS #24683]

I would go along with a constitutional convention if you could guarantee members of the same quality as those who wrote the first one. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams, etc. Offhand, I don't see many around.

 

The O'Meara, himself

 

Just picture in your mind Pelosi or Harry Reid chairing a new Constitutional Convention.

 

End of discussion.

[Seldom Seen #16162]

So what means do the people have when their elected officials ignore their desires?

 

We currently have a President, Congress and Federal Court system that is determined to destroy the middle class and turn our nation into a socalistic nation.

 

Consider Obama is just one Supreme Court appointment to move the Court to the left for a long time, perhaps permanently.

 

Party D has passed much legislation in the last two years to cause this to happen.

 

Party R contolled Congress for 12 years and the Presidency for 8 years and they broke their promises to the voters for smaller government and less spending.

 

Party R regained conrtol of the House not based on what they will do when back in power but as the lessor of two evils. In fact they are already showing their spots by opposing a ban on earmarks.

 

The teabaggers are not being taken seriously by either party.

 

The main role of government is too expand and gather more power.

 

Revision of the tax code will not happen because the government will have too give up power.

 

The general attitude is if conservatives go toe-to-toe with the libs the libs will win. Somehow a constitutional convention willl result in win for the Libs and we will lose all of our freedoms. I sure this is the same attitude of most of the colonists during the Revolutionary War. I think a Constitutiional Convention scares the bejabbers out of our leaders, MOC, and Supreme Court. Otherwise the next choice will be to take up arms (not that that is a bad idea either).

[Waimea]

Completely agree with the good Colonel.

 

I also have a couple of questions:

 

1. Under what circumstances is it legal to convene a Constitutional Convention?

 

2. Who can initiate it? President? Some members of Congress? If so, how many?

 

3. Can the initiation of a Convention be blocked?

 

3. I probably know the answer already to this one: Who gets to go? Is everyone in Congress involved or just a select few? How about SCOTUS, do they get involved too?

 

 

Personally, I think that this would be a HUGE mistake to lay all our freedoms on the table for examination by ANYONE but a great opportunity for more power-grabbing. But I agree with The O'Meara, if we could bring Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and Madison back THEN maybe they could clarify a few things.

 

Waimea (who hopes we keep all 50 stars on the flag)

 

[Waimea]

A lot of my questions were answered here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to...es_Constitution

 

W

 

[Hacker, SASS #55963]

Deleted he found it.

[J-BAR #18287]

Thank you Colonel Dan for your efforts to educate us. I mean that sincerely.

 

My formal education was scientific, technical. I had no interest in history as a high school or college student, much to my regret. I appreciate those who are better informed than I, such as you, to provide perspective on these things.

 

I recently purchased a copy of Ron Chernow's biography of Alexander Hamilton. It has given me new insight on the Revolutionary War and the history of the Constitution. I regret that I have been so ignorant most of my adult life. The process of catching up is daunting.

 

If you were to run for office, sir, you would get support.

[Nate Clayton, SASS #63196]

...oops. Clicked submit before I was ready...

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

Thanks Colonel Dan!

 

Michigan had it's Constitution on the ballot this year...thankfully the meaasure was defeated!

 

GG ~

[MMJ#89586]

Thank you Colonel Dan for your efforts to educate us. I mean that sincerely.

 

My formal education was scientific, technical. I had no interest in history as a high school or college student, much to my regret. I appreciate those who are better informed than I, such as you, to provide perspective on these things.

 

I recently purchased a copy of Ron Chernow's biography of Alexander Hamilton. It has given me new insight on the Revolutionary War and the history of the Constitution. I regret that I have been so ignorant most of my adult life. The process of catching up is daunting.

 

If you were to run for office, sir, you would get support.

 

It can at times be very hard for me to get interested in the revolutionary war. Which is really sad on my part.