Now is the Time for a Convention of States --- UPDATED ---

Time to read
8 minutes
Read so far

Now is the Time for a Convention of States --- UPDATED ---

March 05, 2021 - 05:00
Posted in:
6 comments

Now is the Time for a Convention of States

You are going to hear about the effort to organize a convention of states according to Article V of the U.S. Constitution with increasing intensity over the next several months. For your convenience, and to help shed light on the myths versus facts about this effort, I am embedding the audio from a radio conversation that I participated in with Professor Joe Heim and the host, Mike Hayes, on WIZM radio.

Here are some of the highlights of that discussion:

At approximately 1:40 in the audio Professor Heim, right out of the gate, misleads listeners by calling this a "Constitutional Convention." He is completely wrong. The Constitutional Convention was the meeting in 1787 in Philadelphia where delegates from 12 states met to first create the United States Constitution. Part of that document which our nation ratified and is still the law of the land today includes Article V which reads in part:

"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..."

No one, not a single person, is advocating for a Constitutional Convention to throw out the current document and start over with a new one. The effort under way today is simply an Article V convention of states where amendments may be considered but would still have to be ratified by three fourths of the states in order for them to become official.

Be warned: Professor Heim is using the types of hyperbole and mis-information (fake news if you will) to fear monger and scare you into opposing this effort. This kind of fake news will intensify as more and more states sign on and pass their applications for the convention of states to take place.

At approximately 2:00 in the audio, Mike Hayes raises his concern about putting politicians in charge of amending the U.S. Constitution. While I completely understand his concern I have to say, "Why are politicians in charge of health insurance? Why are politicians in charge of marriage? Why are politicians in charge of social engineering? Etc, Etc." The answer to those questions is that liberal politicians and their liberal activist judges have been slowly destroying the U.S. Constitution for decades through un-Constitutional legal precedents. We the People can demand a "reset" by amending the Constitution and invalidating those legal precedents through the legal procedures outlined in Article V of the U.S. Constitution.

Once two thirds of the states have completed the application process for calling the convention of states they will next need to appoint delegates to attend. I HIGHLY encourage those of you who are average, every day Americans to aggressively petition your state legislature and get appointed as a delegate. I agree with Mike Hayes that politicians should have little involvement, however, Article V gives state representatives the authority to appoint the delegates however they see fit. If enough concerned citizens come forward to put pressure on them then they will appoint the right people.

At approximately 2:50 in the audio, Professor Heim makes the totally asinine suggestion that a convention of states could be used to repeal the first or second amendments. This is EXACTLY the kind of misleading hyperbole and fake news that liberals all across the United States will use to trick you into opposing this effort. First, at a convention of states where thousands of Americans from all across the nation would gather to discuss amendments, do you REALLY believe that some idiot would be able to convince the majority of that gathering to support such an asinine idea? Second, if there were enough idiots to support it at the convention do you REALLY believe that three fourths of the states would vote in favor of ratifying it? Come on, professor, we're not that stupid.

At about 3:50 in the audio I was allowed to participate and helped guide Professor Heim back to reality and away from his liberal talking points. Mike Hayes asked me why we should even bother with the convention of states and I described why I am concerned about our nation's future. As I mentioned in the audio, our nation is split nearly 50/50 between those of us who believe in the U.S. Constitution as it was written (originalists like Justice Clarence Thomas) and those who believe that the Constitution is out dated and irrelevant and that our society and culture should dictate which laws should or should not apply (activist judges like Justice Sonia Sotomayor).

The remainder of the audio included some interesting conversation about my suggestion that one of the amendments I would like to see proposed is one that mandates term limits for federal judges so they are recycled more often instead of spending their entire lives finding new ways to thwart the Founding Fathers.

As you can tell, I strongly believe that an Article V - Convention of States is a very good idea.

First, the U.S. Congress has proven that it is totally unreliable and incapable of policing themselves. Two thirds of that body would never take the steps necessary to amend the Constitution in the manner that We the People are demanding.

Second, the Convention of States is one of the most important release valves that the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution so that We the People can exercise our authority over the federal government as they intended. We are at the top of the political organization structure in this nation - not the politicians who SERVE US.

By following the procedures outlined within the Constitution to call a convention of states we are sending a powerful message to Washington that we've had enough of their B.S. and we are going to put a stop to it.

Third, our nation is divided. Our people are pitted against one another in multiple ways. Our leaders manipulate us through our differences instead of uniting us by our common values. I firmly believe that a convention of states might act like a pressure valve to release some of the tension that has built up among us by giving all of us an opportunity to come together, discuss our differences, propose sound amendments to the Constitution that can help us going forward, and build good will throughout the nation. I fear that if this kind of peaceful effort does not take place then more violent efforts will occur. We have already witnessed violent protests by Marxist Revolutionaries in large cities throughout the nation in 2020. There are states who are seriously considering seceding from the union. I have heard of at least two organizations that are drafting new declarations of independence from the federal government. I fear that if we do not come together at a peaceful convention of states then we may fracture into groups even further to persecute each other according to our differences.

There are currently 15 states who have signed on to the effort to call for a convention of states according to Article V of the U.S. Constitution. 34 are necessary in order to call the convention. Be very cautious about what you hear in the media regarding this effort because the closer we get to 34 states signing on, the Leftists in this nation are going to pull out all the stops and lie, cheat, and steal in order to stop this from happening. They hate the Constitution and the people's power and they want all authority to remain within the bureaucracy in Washington. Fight them by informing yourselves and exercising the authority that you have as a citizen of the United States. To learn more visit the web site for the Convention of States by clicking here.

--- UPDATE ---
Come to the information meeting being held in Leon, Wi on March 11, 2021 starting at 6pm. Find details here.

There are 6 Comments

For some reason, I was listening to WPR (WHLA) this afternoon and caught part of a show called, I think, "Central Time." They were interviewing some reporter from the Capitol Times named Jesse something, the political writer for that paper. She was talking about a "Constitutional convention" being called in order to "pass an amendment requiring a balanced budget." She said nothing about Article V, and I wonder whether she was confused about the distinction between a Constitutional Convention and a Convention of the States. She alluded to some legislative action with regard to the "Constitutional convention," and mentioned that some number of states were already behind the measure. SHe seems to have muddled several concepts. Anyone else know anything about this?

My predictions are coming true. That is exactly the kind of lying, half-truths that I anticipated they would come up with. Thanks for the report.

We can take back America, as I see it. We have enough states that make up this country, that we can change the fact that we have California and several others setting lots of policy in America, against the wishes of most states.

As stated, the knowledgeable people realize there is no concern that this can jeopardize our Constitution. We can take back America!

All of the concerns about terrible outcomes from this Convention are not warranted, this was set up for us by the Founders and for exactly the reason we need it today. Anyone who has concerns, needs to research the process, it is safe.

I hope and believe our goals are the same: a limited, fiscally responsible government that respects the rights of its citizens. But on how to accomplish that, I am afraid we must agree to disagree.

I know you discount this argument, but the FIRST constitutional convention was called, not to create a new constitution, but to amend the articles of confederation, and yet, it did "run away" to make what we have today (along with 27 amendments since.) So a runaway IS possible.

But that is not even the strongest argument against a CoS. First, is the constitution we have being respected and followed? Obviously not. So what makes ANYONE think that any new amendments would be any more likely to be followed than the much-abused constitution we now have?

Next argument. Who will choose the delegates? The governors or the legislatures of the states I suppose. But with a roughly 50-50 split on Democrat vs. Republcian (discounting the votes of minor parties,) obviously about half of the delegates are not likely to have the same mindset as you and I. And even here in WI, as much as I dislike Evers and Democrats generally, I am quite sure I would not trust the likes of Robin Vos to select delegates that I could agree with.

You want to limit goverNMEnt spending? That is actually quite easily done, IF we get rid of the Federal Reserve. The FED creates money out of nothing, to loan to the fedgov, meaning that future taxpayers will pay interest on these newly created dollars. Without the ability to "legally" counterfeit, the fedgov would be much more restricted in how much it could spend.

You want to limit the power of the fedgov? Great goal. But note that ALL the powers of the fedgov. are granted in Article I Section 8, and that the 10th amendment puts a (somewhat) hard cap on that by stating, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." What could be more clear and limiting than that? And yet, the fedgov has GREATLY expanded its powers, contra the Constitution and the 10th Amendment.

And last even by your own argument, since 3/4 of the states must go along with any proposed amendment, what are the chances of that? Recall how divided we are as a country when you consider this point. My guess ( and yes, only a guess) is that any amendment that could pass would have to be so watered down as to be nearly useless. Example- balanced budget- now and forever? WHat of war? What of another National Emergency ( as Dems have declared the C19 adventure.)

In conclusion, given the chances of a runaway, however remote; given the lack of control that advocates of the CoS will have over delegates, and the likelihood that not a few leftist loonies would be along for the ride; given the difficulty in passing new amendments at the state level: given that any such amendments would be so watered down as to be near useless, and finally, GIVEN THE MANY OTHER MORE PRODUCTIVE activities that we could put our time, efforts and money toward, why not concentrate on electing candidates who WILL respect and abide by the constitution? If we can not achieve the latter, how will we ever achieve the rest? I see the entire effort as an exercise in futility that is likely to drain resources-time, effort and money- that could be put to more productive endeavors. Like maybe properly educating our children.

...I do not have the defeatist attitude the you exhibit. I believe we must do both: 1) Convention of States so We the People can take control of our government back and 2) elect people who believe in the same. Finally, we can leave the education of our children in the hands of the experts: parents. That shouldn't even be a political discussion.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.