|
|
Post by 1shotwade on Apr 28, 2015 23:26:20 GMT
I thought you all should know since this is a big deal if it happens. My wife was watching the 700 club today and they are talking about people are actively pursuing A constitutional convention! My understanding is that the states that have requested a convention in the past(34 now I believe) are being contacted to make arrangement for this to happen.
My understanding of this is that 34 states must request the convention before it can begin and it takes 38 states to ratify any changes to the constitution.I'm sure some of you out there know more about this than I do. Please take the time to comment on this and possibly clarify anything I may have gotten wrong!
Wade
|
|
|
|
Post by manygoatsnmore on Apr 28, 2015 23:41:10 GMT
What amendment are they working on? Equal rights? I think that is the last one that was proposed and not ratified?
|
|
|
|
Post by 1shotwade on Apr 29, 2015 1:18:16 GMT
My understanding is much bigger than that. What I have been lead to believe is that there is a provision in the constitution to be able to change the constitution,not just an individual amendment.My understanding of this is that it could lead to an entirely new constitution,not just an amendment. This "constitutional convention" Has never taken place. The provision for the convention is a fail safe for the country when and if the government gets out of control and is no longer guided by the constitution.
I have witnessed numerous conversations about this and I do think we are at or near the point of needing a convention to "reset" the values subscribed to in our constitution.It is the ultimate last ditch effort to remain a free country controlled by the people.For instance Take the word liberty. To me and the way I interpret the provision for liberty is that we as a people are at liberty to do just about anything we would like to do AS LONG AS WE ARE NOT INFRINGING UPON ANOTHER PERSON'S LIBERTY ! That's what I think the constitution says and that's what I think the constitution means.But that is NOT what i see in our country today.
This is a big deal! I once thought "this is great! It needs to happen,NOW ! Since then I have been reminded of some of the idiots we have in office and I am no longer sure it is a good thing! Hopefully someone that knows more than I will be able to add to this.
Wade
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 2:17:42 GMT
IIRC, once a Constitutional Convention is convened anything and everything in the Constitution is open to change, removal, etc.
In other words, everything is fair game!!!
I will have to check on that, but that is how I remember a Constitutional Convention works.
If I am right and a Constitutional Convention is in the works things could get real interesting real fast.  |
|
|
|
Post by manygoatsnmore on Apr 29, 2015 2:45:40 GMT
What are the odds that 34 states will agree to call the convention, much less enough states to ratify anything? If the congress of each state has to agree to it, I don't see it happening, unfortunately. How exactly does it work? Do the voters have to put an initiative on the ballot, or does a bill have to go through the state house or?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 3:02:12 GMT
I was partially correct...
It seems that since an Article V Convention (aka Constitutional Convention) has never before occurred since the first one, there is much debate about how to go about convening one, who can do what, what is the convention limited to, is the convention limited, what are the duties of Congress, etc.
My belief is that one should not only abide by what Article V says regarding this subject...
"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.
...but also by the writings of the founding fathers in the Federalist Papers... Back in the early 70's Congress attempted to insert itself more into the process, but luckily the attempt failed. Many view an Article V Convention as a means for the states and its citizens to bypass Congress and as has been proven by its attempt to interject itself as a bigger player in an Article V Convention, Congress does not seem to be too happy about any attempt to bypass them.
Perhaps Congress is afraid that the people will come to the realization that they really are not as necessary as they think themselves.
YMMV....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 3:07:17 GMT
What are the odds that 34 states will agree to call the convention, much less enough states to ratify anything? If the congress of each state has to agree to it, I don't see it happening, unfortunately. How exactly does it work? Do the voters have to put an initiative on the ballot, or does a bill have to go through the state house or?
I think if a convention is convened the state legislatures would be the ones doing the majority of the work and making the majority of the decisions, though it may be written into some state constitutions that the public may vote. It all depends on the states and how they see fit to operate.
Needless to say, these are uncharted waters. Especially since it has never before happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by solargeek on Apr 29, 2015 3:07:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by manygoatsnmore on Apr 29, 2015 3:14:32 GMT
Thank you - it's been a very long time since I studied all this. I'm learning today.  |
|
|
|
Post by 1shotwade on Apr 29, 2015 3:16:21 GMT
Last year the 34th state called for a convention. That reaches the requirement set forth to hold the convention. The previous stated did the same over a 4-5 year period to this. Now it is in question where or not these states can be counted because of the time difference.That is the first hurdle.Once that is established they will move on to dating and locating the convention.All states are mandated to participate.
Since this has never been done before there is much confusion at to the appropriate procedures and even who is to represent each state.As Trellis said,it opens up the entire constitution to the possibility of change.My understanding is that they were interviewing senators today on the show. Once all the details are worked out the convention will look at the constitution as a whole and attempt to change it for the better to moreover represent the needs of the country.
Many things that you and I may believe is appropriate such as the right to carry a gun,may bestricken down or may be held up, many if not all of the article will at the least be reviewed and quite possibly re interpreted and clarified to being more appropriate to todays standards.
I wish i knew more but I do believe this is a make or break moment for the country.
Wade
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 3:28:16 GMT
Last year the 34th state called for a convention. That reaches the requirement set forth to hold the convention. The previous stated did the same over a 4-5 year period to this. Now it is in question where or not these states can be counted because of the time difference.That is the first hurdle.Once that is established they will move on to dating and locating the convention.All states are mandated to participate. Since this has never been done before there is much confusion at to the appropriate procedures and even who is to represent each state.As Trellis said,it opens up the entire constitution to the possibility of change.My understanding is that they were interviewing senators today on the show. Once all the details are worked out the convention will look at the constitution as a whole and attempt to change it for the better to moreover represent the needs of the country. Many things that you and I may believe is appropriate such as the right to carry a gun,may bestricken down or may be held up, many if not all of the article will at the least be reviewed and quite possibly re interpreted and clarified to being more appropriate to todays standards. I wish i knew more but I do believe this is a make or break moment for the country. Wade
Some of the indecision as to whether or not there have been enough states calling for an Article V Convention is that some states have withdrawn their request and then turned around and restated their request.
Some requests are from a long time ago and some feel that there should be a time limit of validity per each request.
Another problem is that some believe that all 34 states must request a convention concerning a single issue.
Yet another problem is that some believe that states that issue a open request (no reason or issue given) should not be considered.
There are not many written rules concerning any of this except that if 2/3's of the states request a convention, then Congress must permit it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Apr 29, 2015 18:46:41 GMT
Mark Levin wrote a book recently, The Liberty Amendments giving his suggestions for 11 changes to the Constitution. The one I find most appealing concerns term limits. That alone would change the entire complexion of the way Congress operates. Of course, all our current congress people will do everything they can to torpedo that idea, but wouldn't it be great?
|
|
|
|
Post by 1shotwade on Apr 29, 2015 20:02:44 GMT
Mark Levin wrote a book recently, The Liberty Amendments giving his suggestions for 11 changes to the Constitution. The one I find most appealing concerns term limits. That alone would change the entire complexion of the way Congress operates. Of course, all our current congress people will do everything they can to torpedo that idea, but wouldn't it be great? HERE HERE! Exactly! Nailed it! And I would go as far as "one and done"! But as you stated, congress makes the laws! This shouldn't be.I would also like to see the individual states be responsible for paying their congressmen and senators!"if you don't vote the way your state wants you to vote,you don't get paid! That would be true representation! It tires me to watch these people the day after an election starting to work on their next campaign and they do! And why should we continue to pay the salaries of people that only work an average of 32 hours a month? You and i couldn't get by with that!If they would spend a little more time on the job they would have time to read what is in a bill before voting on it then being surprised at what is actually contained in it!And they set themselves up on a pedestal above the people and pass laws that the entire nation has to abide by EXCEPT CONGRESS! (health care) It's a good thing for the rest of the country but not them!I believe those positions should be no different that the military in that it should be your duty to serve for an appointed time and then get out of the was so another can come in and correct what you spent your time trying to mess up! Yeap,one and done! Go out in a blaze of glory or just flame out. The choice is yours but it is your one and only chance to do something good for our country! Wade |
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Apr 30, 2015 2:31:55 GMT
Just think of how differently they'd vote if they knew that after their brief time in DC they'd have to go to your local restaurants and shops for the rest of their lives and have to listen to comments about their votes? I could give Billy Long or Roy Blunt and earful every time I saw them, but I never see them.
|
|
|
|
Post by strawberrygirl on Apr 30, 2015 13:40:59 GMT
Mark Levin wrote a book recently, The Liberty Amendments giving his suggestions for 11 changes to the Constitution. The one I find most appealing concerns term limits. That alone would change the entire complexion of the way Congress operates. Of course, all our current congress people will do everything they can to torpedo that idea, but wouldn't it be great? My husband has been talking about this forever! Like you said, they will do everything they can to shoot it down. |
|
|
|
Post by stickinthemud on Apr 30, 2015 15:25:29 GMT
Just think of how differently they'd vote if they knew that after their brief time in DC they'd have to go to your local restaurants and shops for the rest of their lives and have to listen to comments about their votes? I could give Billy Long or Roy Blunt and earful every time I saw them, but I never see them. Why wait? Send the House Home. The Senate has responsibilities to advise & consent, but why does the House of Representatives need to be in Washington all the time? Where lobbyists have more access than we do. Let them come home NOW and go to DC for a limited term each year. Interact with their congressional colleagues online while they interact with their constituents in real life. Then they can deal with the local roads, local health care system, local schools, and everything else they supposedly 'represent'. And if they claim they need to be there to help you "deal with the bureaucracy", make that incentive to simplify the system. And insist that they never "Pass the bill before they can read it" They might even have time for a real job back home. Or somebody with a real job (farm?) might be able to represent us. |
|
|
|
Post by themotherhen on May 3, 2015 7:13:48 GMT
All of these ideas are good ones; limited terms, outside employment for congressmen, etc. but they make too much money from lobbyists lining their pockets. The ones in power would never vote to have their power limited, Washington would declare martial law before they would give up power. Then things would really get interesting. All federal welfare payments would be on hold, imagine how well that would go over in the big cities. Ferguson would look like a Sunday School ice cream social compared to that. A change is necessary, but a Constitutional Convention could get ugly, fast. Much prayer, study and thinking should be done regarding this situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Muller's Lane Farm on May 3, 2015 8:01:57 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!!
Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me.
|
|
|
|
Post by motdaugrnds on May 3, 2015 13:13:42 GMT
Thanks Wade for starting this thread. I'm finding this entire situation interesting as I'm looking at it from a spiritual perspective. A re-do of the constitution would lay wide open the rights of all Americans and possibly bring out the "hidden" laws that have been on the books but dormant for so many years...one being the "Blue Laws". From a spirutual point of view this would lay the foundation for church and state to interttwine and we all know what can occur should this is made an enforceable law.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 14:30:31 GMT
OK, if a re-do should be called for, who would represent the states? Our present elected representatives? Now how much of the changes would WE approve of, or would it be just what THEY want? I think it would strangle us even more than they so now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2015 16:09:35 GMT
I think it gives new meaning to being a prepper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 1:23:36 GMT
Just think of how differently they'd vote if they knew that after their brief time in DC they'd have to go to your local restaurants and shops for the rest of their lives and have to listen to comments about their votes? I could give Billy Long or Roy Blunt and earful every time I saw them, but I never see them. Shouldn't be that hard. Mc Caskill's office and her both know me after speaking to her many times and calling her office. They know very well what I think of her. But every time I talk with her I might as well talk to a wall.
I'm thinking I need to get hold of some friends and family of mine in Jefferson City. I personally know a Former President, he is out of it but he knows people too.
Rockpile
|
|
|
|
Post by rick on May 20, 2015 3:09:26 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!! Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me. Scary. |
|
|
|
Post by whisperwindkat on May 20, 2015 10:51:43 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!! Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me. This! A new convention would lay wide open a path to the destruction of our rights and liberties currently barely held in place by the constitution. A new Constitutional Convention is a thing to fear and a thing to fight against tooth and nail. It would be the last destruction of the republic that we all hold so dear. |
|
|
|
Post by amylou on May 20, 2015 13:18:14 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!! Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me. This! A new convention would lay wide open a path to the destruction of our rights and liberties currently barely held in place by the constitution. A new Constitutional Convention is a thing to fear and a thing to fight against tooth and nail. It would be the last destruction of the republic that we all hold so dear. My thoughts exactly! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 14:34:28 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!! Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me. Exactly! I have grave concerns about the results of a Convention. It sounds good but I think we all know that the America haters and the Nanny State people will do everything in their power to subvert the current Constitution. Adios 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, and who knows what else. My understanding is that once this starts there are no limitations on outcome. |
|
|
|
Post by farmchix on May 20, 2015 14:57:04 GMT
I haven't read most of this thread but I will admit when I first heard rumblings about a Constitutional Convention a few years ago, my heart LEAPT with excitement thinking that NOW maybe we can get this country back to our ROOTS!! Then I realized .... what if the constitutional convention is meant to bring the USofA into more of a socialist society like the EU?? The thought scares me. My understanding, which could be wrong, is that is more of the rationale....interesting to say the least. Will definitely need to keep our ears and eyes out for more news on this. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on May 20, 2015 15:23:14 GMT
For those of us who have trepidations about the possibility of the Constitution being changed for the worse, let's first admit the Constitution as it stands has been used and abused to the point it's nearly unrecognizable as the document written by the founders. Between corrupt politicians, and judicial activism it's engendered a political class, vote buying, abortion, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, the NSA surveillance, and myriad other perversions of a once great achievement.
Rather than fearing a Constitutional Convention, I look at it as a chance to plug the holes left open through the inability of the founders to predict future society, although several warned of the possibility of corruption by unscrupulous men. For instance, they never foresaw the emergence of career politicians, which allows for re-election of the most corrupt among us to profit personally from their political actions. How could they envision electronic surveillance of our every communication? Why would they think their words could be interpreted to allow the killing of babies?
No, this would be an opportunity which may never seen again to put right those things that have either been omitted through honest ignorance, or corrupted by self serving and greedy men. By leaving the original wording and structure of the Constitution, but adding verbiage that both more defines its meaning, and reduces Federal power we can better safeguard our own, and this country's future.
Sorry for the rant, but this is something I'm passionate about.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1shotwade on May 20, 2015 17:01:49 GMT
I agree with you 100% Tom! Here is the problem as I see it.My understanding is that there is no set guidelines as to who represents each state as well as who ratifies each change that is agreed upon.If it's the same bunch of crooks we have representing us in Washington now how could we ever expect to see positive change. This is the same bunch with the same mind set that has screwed up the constitution over the years. They are all career politicians and will not pass a vote to end career politicians.They are almost all anti gun anti freedom anti individualism and pro big government. Almost to the individual,they will vote for anything that will damage the middle class and have a country of the haves(themselves) and the have not's ( the rest of us)!
It's not likely we will go to the polls and vote for or against an individual item of change,and even if we do it will be by electoral college instead of each individual vote actually counting for something.And even if it were to happen in this manner,it will be conducted according to the rules and laws in place at the time which will be some of the stupid stuff that has been passed lately like a cooperation is an individual or not limits on contractions by cooperation's and the like.
Who is going to interpret the original intent of individual articles of the constitution?The same nut cases we have now that can't wait to take our guns and other liberties away?It's not like anyone is going to care what you and I have to say because we do not have political pull. The lobbyists will be buying every vote the can to make their lives better and ours worse!Corruption breeds more corruption. Until we find a way to hold a convention that truly represents the will of the people it isn't going to benefit the people,only the crooks.
Just my opinion.
Wade
|
|
|
|
Post by themotherhen on May 21, 2015 4:49:18 GMT
Blessings to you, Wade. You sound like my husband. These are times to make men tremble.
|
|
