Did Michigan just trigger 'constitutional convention'? Bid gains steam

Did Michigan just trigger 'constitutional convention'? Bid gains steam

WASHINGTON – Momentum is building behind what would be an unprecedented effort to amend the U.S. Constitution, through a little-known provision that gives states rather than Congress the power to initiate changes.

At issue is what's known as a "constitutional convention," a scenario tucked into Article V of the U.S. Constitution. At its core, Article V provides two ways for amendments to be proposed. The first – which has been used for all 27 amendment to date – requires two-thirds of both the House and Senate to approve a resolution, before sending it to the states for ratification. The Founding Fathers, though, devised an alternative way which says if two-thirds of state legislatures demand a meeting, Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.”

The idea has gained popularity among constitutional scholars in recent years -- but got a big boost last week when Michigan lawmakers endorsed it.

Michigan matters, because by some counts it was the 34th state to do so. That makes two-thirds.

Click link for remainder of the article.

I am really curious to see how this is going to be received in D.C..

I am also curious to see if our elected officials finally understand just how upset the American people are. While I am glad that this might be a possibility I am also concerned about proposed amendments. The possibility of this blowing up in our faces is present. While we view it as wanting to make some changes others may use it for other purposes.

Thoughts?

reply to post by Xcathdra

Thoughts?

Link

Apologize for just posting a link. Gotta hit the sack.

reply to post by Xcathdra

I think it is scary.

I would expect that the convention would be hijacked and the Second Amendment would be removed... among other things.

What needs to happen is an amendment providing for term limits in Congress.

butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I think it is scary.

I would expect that the convention would be hijacked and the Second Amendment would be removed... among other things.

What needs to happen is an amendment providing for term limits in Congress.

I agree. This is the worst idea we could have happen. It's a great one...if the system works as it's supposed to. However, we're here every day talking about how state and federal officials both are corrupt as they come. Yet, we think they'll respect and honor a system which can modify the very points of the Constitution some have dreamed of a world without?

We don't figure the corruption may go to whatever length it takes?

I think if it happens? The end result will be a much different and much more depressing thing than people imagine with an ideal working system for it.

What we need to do is reverse the amendment where US Senators are directly elected, rather than how it originally was, that they were elected by members of their state's legislature.
What we have now are election campaign war chests in the millions that guarantee that we have a Senate sold to the highest bidder, like Hilary representing China.

Snarl
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Thoughts?

Link

Apologize for just posting a link. Gotta hit the sack.

My bad... I did a search and nothing popped up. Most likely because the titles are different.

Wrabbit2000

butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I think it is scary.

I would expect that the convention would be hijacked and the Second Amendment would be removed... among other things.

What needs to happen is an amendment providing for term limits in Congress.

I agree. This is the worst idea we could have happen. It's a great one...if the system works as it's supposed to. However, we're here every day talking about how state and federal officials both are corrupt as they come. Yet, we think they'll respect and honor a system which can modify the very points of the Constitution some have dreamed of a world without?

We don't figure the corruption may go to whatever length it takes?

I think if it happens? The end result will be a much different and much more depressing thing than people imagine with an ideal working system for it.

Can you lock / delete this thread. Apparently there is a thread already going.

Maybe we should have a fourth branch of government. The "Governorship" made up of the 50 state Governors.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Yeeeeaaaah, we must be mindful which doors we open, for some doors swing both ways. If this comes to fruition, I am certain our collective Legislators will hit the Obama Administration's brick wall(s). Congress is not prepared to amend the Constitution, nor is the majority fully aware of what Obama will require to be included for his approval. This is a prime example of "putting the cart before the horse". Eyebrows raised. Let us wait until the current Administration has vacated the White House before proposals are made in such a rare circumstance. Before that glorious day, we need to elect a President who will take direction from the States before he/she imposes his/her powers of executive orders or veto. However, we must first elect a Congress with an unified voice and the desire to move as one towards resolving our Nation's identity crisis. Lord help us, for we are standing at the cross-roads of possible Liberty progression or further degredation/oppression.

It's not a constitutional convention.

The constitution is not on the table.

It is a convention of the states, for the purpose of amending the constitution.

Calm down it's not going to be hijacked.

You need 38 states to ratify an amendment.

That's 38 state legislatures. Not 38 governors. Governors have no role whatsoever.

The federal government has absolutely no role in the process either.

So just calm down the 2nd amendment isn't going anywhere.
There are 26 solid red state legislatures. Iam pretty sure we can get 13 to not ratify stupid Marxist democrat proposals.

reply to post by Xcathdralar


There is a big problem here. The provision says that upon the application (singular) of 2/3 of the states. It is pretty unanimous among legal experts that piecemeal applications won't work . And ratification takes 3/4 and not 2/3.

reply to post by F4guy


From the wiki:

Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification.[1]
Amendments may be adopted and sent to the states for ratification by either:
Two-thirds (supermajority) of both the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States Congress;
OR
By a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds (at present 34) of the states.
To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either (as determined by Congress):
The legislatures of three-fourths (at present 38) of the states;
OR
State ratifying conventions in three-fourths (at present 38) of the states.

There is a long held belief, and well documented, that since the US went bankrupt 100 years ago it has not been operating under the constitution at all - save for ceremonial and fig leaf purposes to fool the population. Many would contend it goes back all the way to Lincoln.

Assuming the constitution has been suspended by both the bankruptcy and the emergency powers act business, it would be interesting to see this happen if only to see if amending the document's intentions would matter? Consider the "balanced budged amendment" would have to include the issue of the bankruptcy, the truth about the Federal Reserve and probably have to open the books, to say nothing of the fact that passing it would mean the Constitution would be in order or everyone looks really bad - like treason bad.

Of course the problem is the majority of those involved would be inherently corrupt at some level and ignorant at most levels and that doesn't bode well. The folks who drafted that document were educated, the folks who interpret it do so in order to find ways to break it apart based on some pre-programmed notion of what "created equal" means.

reply to post by butcherguy


You can be sure there will be a push to target the 2nd...

There will also be significant push-back if they get close to passing a repeal.

And if they do pass a repeal of the 2nd there will almost certainly be more than just push back...

An estimated 270 million firearms & 50 million gun owners say so

coldkidc
reply to post by butcherguy

 

You can be sure there will be a push to target the 2nd...

There will also be significant push-back if they get close to passing a repeal.

And if they do pass a repeal of the 2nd there will almost certainly be more than just push back...

An estimated 270 million firearms & 50 million gun owners say so

edit on 4-4-2014 by coldkidc because: (no reason given)

I see you didnt read the entire page. Bjaxer(the guy with yellow avatar) explained what was on the table. They have to be specific when calling these things. They cant be willy nilly.