Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
There is a discussion going on regarding this topic. We have moved that discussion to this Discussion collumn where discussions are supposed to be. It will make this discussion easier to find when it eventually lands in the Archives. We are posting first entry from our Comments Home page for this topic first. From here, post your comments and replies in the Comment section below.
Opening post on March 5, 2019:
Susan Ellsworth 22 hours ago
An Article V Conventions is dangerous. I must open this discussion up for I believe it will have irreversible consequences. The communists have been placing there evil people amongst us to trick us into voting them in as delegates. Once the door is close they themselves can change the rules. The US will be destroyed from within. Our founding fathers knew this sad fact.
Comment by Joshua W. Carden 20 hours ago
Susan, an unchecked congress and Supreme Court are also dangerous. The framers knew that the states needed to retain the ability to propose amendments and that’s why we have Article V. Don’t forget an article V convention cannot by itself change the constitution: it can only PROPOSE amendments that must still be then ratified by three-fourths of the states. EVEN IF every state ONLY sent “communists and socialists” to an Article V Amendments Convention, the states would still have the opportunity to ratify (or not) any proposed amendments. In that sense, it is no different than Congress proposing amendments (the way previous amendments have come about). The states get the final word. The important difference is that Washington has not proposed ANY amendments to limit the federal government’s overreaching. The states will have to step up and do that to rebalance the federal/state system - or nobody will.
Comment by Mike White 19 hours ago
It appears that Susan does not understand the difference between a Convention of States and a Constitutional Convention. I wouldn't want the neo-Marxists and embedded Communists anywhere near the latter, but the former can be set up within constraints. And we desperately need it to get our Constitutional system back; the federal government is out of control with no end in sight, even with our outsider President.
Editor: see all other comments in the appropriate box below.
Comment by Jaspersgoat 15 hours ago
I would like to see this as a full blown discussion. Susan, why not write up your evidence even if it is anecdotal in a Discussion blog above. This would make for a lively discussion. I would like to see what you base your opinion on.
Comment by Susan Ellsworth 15 hours ago
Can we start with being real people jaspergoat...I used my real name.
Comment by Mike White 14 hours ago
One very conservative Constitutional lawyer and scholar, Mark Levin, has explained at length the major differences between the Convention of States and a Constitutional Convention. The way the Convention of States is being set up and voted on successfully so far by multiple states is very safe. The neo-Marxists have no mechanism to turn it into a destruction of the Constitution. Its whole limited purpose is to restore Article 5 and roll back the unconstitutional assumption of power by branches of government (esp. the Judicial Branch making law, and all branches usurping sovereignty of the states). Also, a balanced budget can be forced, among other important corrections that are needed.
Comment by Jaspersgoat 14 hours ago
You are right on, Mike. He even wrote a book about it. Hard to read because he is so darn intelligent but I was able to get through it. He's the reason I changed my view on this issue. I have yet to talk to anyone who knows there is a difference between a Conv. of States and a Constitutional Convention. Most speak of the latter when they think they are speaking about the former. Thanks for bringing that up. And BTW, the Constitution is being deconstructed every day. Surely we all know that. I would like to see term limits, too. Congress will never vote themselves out of a job. Our gov was never meant to have career politicians.
Comment by Mike White 14 hours ago
There are even high-ranking Republicans in AZ who fell for the fear mongering against the Convention of States. Most have learned more and switched their position, but a few have inexplicably and stubbornly dug in their heals. For example, Andy Biggs, no longer in the State Legislature as Senate President (now in Congress), was the major roadblock against our state passing its support. But later we did.
Comment by Susan Ellsworth 9 hours ago
This got off to a bad beginning.. I would like to open up the discussion because of some research I have found that set me back. I read your name wrong from my phone and felt like you wanted to come out of the gate attacking me instead of having a discussion. You: "Susan, why not write up your evidence even if it is anecdotal in a Discussion blog above. This would make for a lively discussion. "
Lively yes, but hopefully it may be productive. I am not getting paid and am a very busy homeschooling mom. I don't want to be attacked, I just want to evaluate all that has been learned and share a few thoughts and maybe ask a few questions on the subject. I can see that I will be the only one questioning this subject and hundreds firm in their direction on it in this blog. However, I think we agree on many other issues hurting our country or we all wouldn't be in the pro-2A group to begin with. So, may I suggest that we all understand we want the same thing we just may have some concerns about how we get there. I'll be busy tomorrow but I will get back asap. Maybe a little cooling off time would do us some good.
Until then, please enlighten me on the following: I have yet to talk to anyone who knows there is a difference between a Conv. of States and a Constitutional Convention. Do you have a link to show me your understanding of them and where in the constitution they fall? I found one but not the other. The Blue print above doesn't have a working link and I can't read it as it is. Since you are yet to talk to anyone that knows the difference the group may be enlightened as well.
Once I see your post I will research your info on the link you provide and if we agree on that we can safely move to the next subject. Does that sound fair? If not please let me know where you or members of this blog agree we should start I just ask that we stay on one topic until we agree or agree to disagree.
I frequent the Capitol and have helped on other bills but this one has me baffled. I am alway researching and reach out to those on both side of a bill to fully understand perspective.
I see you are using Mark Levins' book, is he the leader of the group? What is the name of the Group and what is the affiliation to AFA?
Thank you in advance.
Susan: If you have read the Posting Rules on our Home Page, you know that AFA does not allow attacks against other activists. We all have our opinions and our view is that intelligent people can discuss important topics intelligently. Even when they disagree.
Comment by Joshua W. Carden 9 hours ago
Susan, I homeschooled from kindergarten through high school and I can safely say that an Article V convention is one of the few things that has actually excited me politically in a LONG time. Read “article V” of the U.S. constitution, which explains the process. Two-thirds of the states may call for a convention to propose new amendments and then three-fourths of the states have to ratify any proposed amendments that come out of the convention. It’s the same as when congress proposes an amendment, except the founders were smart enough to foresee a day when the federal government might not want to propose new amendments to limit their own power. The states still can under article V. There is not ANY provision in the U.S. constitution for holding a “constitutional convention” and none of us in this circle wants that. Be careful of the fear-mongers though: some will say that Soros and others like him are “behind” this effort. Lunacy. If you homeschool, you likely know Mike Farris’s name (or should). He is supporting (and helped start) the CoS group at the link shared earlier, along with Mark Meckler. He is a constitutional scholar and knows his stuff.
Comment by Joshua W. Carden 9 hours ago
P.s. to answer your other question,?the group Convention of States is a national group and has direct affiliation with AFA that I know of. Mark Levin is not directly connected either but is very supportive - his book came out almost in the same month that the COS group got started. Very providential.
Just to be clear, AFA has NO affiliation with any other organizations, including the Convention of States.
Comment by Bruce M Piepho 16 minutes ago
As an intro - I was the LD14 Convention of State COS Captain and it took several years to pass the resolution in the AZ House and Senate. True Senate President Biggs was a road block. In my opinion after working about dozens of articles about the subject from 2103 to passage, in time the 34 state threshold will be achieved. Joshua getting to the actual Article V convention will be the easy part.
Look into the 17th amendment history. The got passed due to heavy media exposure. Now consider the status of the today's media and the problem of over coming negative fake news for amendments coming out of a COS will make the process of ratification of any amendment difficult.
I am a Home School and Charter school advocate as the public education system has become a brain washing indoctrination and fails to teach the Revolutionary war and founding principles. In Sierra Vista seminars are being held teaching the constitution to all ages. I just hope America can withstand the coming storm of a drive to Socialism. The NEW GREEN deal is a watermelon - green on the outside and red Marxist Communism on the inside.
Here is a link to COS' home page: https://conventionofstates.com/. This group is well established and knows what it is doing.