Friday, October 16, 2015

Public forum about calling an Article V convention to amend the Constitution.

The Convention of States Project, organized in all 50 states, is advocating for the Tennessee General Assembly to pass a call for an Article V convention of states to propose amendments to the United States Constitution. Our Article V application includes any proposed amendments within the following topics:

*impose fiscal restraints on the federal government (cut taxes, cut spending, balance the budget)
*limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government (cut out the many three-letter agencies)
*limit the terms of office for Members of Congress and for federal officials.  (including judges)

Join State Senators Bill Ketron and Mike Bell along with Representatives Sheila Butt and Jay Reedy on stage and other State Senators and State Representatives in the audience in a public forum about how the states have the power to rein in the runaway federal government using the Convention of States Project Article V application.

Monday, October 19, 2015 from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM (CDT), Nashville, TN.

*** Free event   *** Free parking   *** Open to the public  *** Eventbrite tickets required

To learn more prior to the event, please go to

While I agree with goals of this movement,  except I am not sold of term limits, I at this time am not in favor of an Article V convention. I fear such a convention could become a runaway convention and amend the Constitution in less favorable ways. I am not convinced the convention could only amend the constitution in the areas for which it was called. I am not an expert on this however. If my circumstances permitted me to do so, I would attend this event to learn more.  I am posting this because I think some of the readers of this blog would be interested, not because I support an Article V convention.  I may be persuadable, but am not there yet. 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories


  1. Who would have thought that this great nation would come to this... a state of paralysis where we would allow "fear" to rule our thinking? Sadly, some of the loudest voices on this issue belong to those who traffic in fear... and for whatever reason, they want to scare us away from using a tool, the ONLY tool, given to the people in the several states to propose amendments to the constitution independent of Congress. Note the words "propose" and "independent."

    They would have us believe that a Convention of States (CoS) is the same as a Constitutional Convention. That's not true. In fact, a Constitutional Convention today would actually be extra-judicial - outside the law - since we already HAVE a Constitution, and the only reason one would call for such an event would be, as they did in 1878, to create a new one, and no one in any competent Article V movement that I'm aware of is even contemplating such a thing. That’s not to say that there aren’t wackos on both ends of the political spectrum and hope-to-die anarchists out there who knowingly and falsely claim that Article V allows for a complete re-write, but that’s not who we’re talking about here. A Convention of States called under the strict letter of Article V would be ONLY to propose amendments to the existing document, not scrap it, and any proposed amendments issued could easily be rejected by the legislatures of just 13 states. No ratification, no amendment, just a proposal, no fear.

    These same people would also have us believe that our current crop of corrupt congress-critters would scuttle the entire convention, despite the safety measures of simple arithmetic mentioned above. What they don't tell you is that the delegates to a CoS will be selected, appointed, commissioned or elected by the various states, and the Constitution prevents sitting members of Congress from holding a second elected office.

    Neither do they mention that the two largest and most likely to succeed Article V movements both have written into the text of the proposed legislation strict limitations on what subjects can even be proposed at the convention. One is limited to proposing a balanced budget amendment only, and the other – the one supported here by Senator Coburn - is a bit more broad, but is still limited to only proposing amendments to the Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress. That's it.

    These are not either / or propositions, and in the end, it's one state, one vote. Delegates at these conventions will be sent there by their state legislatures to propose, debate and dispose of the stated issues. Do you really see a bunch of leftists ending up on either of those delegations? If the proposals pass, they'll be referred back to the various state legislatures for further debate and maybe even local conventions. But nothing happens unless 3/4's of the states ratify. No ratification, no amendment, just proposals, no fear.

  2. MyTwoSenseWorth (above) recites the standard COS talking points.

    But this short paper tells the Truth - and proves it by means of original source documents which you can access via the hyperlinks provided:

    Also! WHO will the Delegates be? George Washington, James Madison, and Ben Franklin won't be there. You don't know who the delegates would be. But (as shown in the linked paper), they will have the power to impose a new Constitution with a new mode of ratification.

    James Madison warned in his Nov 1788 letter to Turberville that at an Art. V convention, "the most violent partizans" and "individuals of insidious views" would have a "dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric" of our Country. Madison "trembled" at the prospect of an Art. V convention.

    Two former US supreme Court Justices have warned that Delegates to a Convention can't be controlled [see linked paper].

    Yet convention supporters ridicule these warnings as “fear mongering”.

    Are there “violent partizans” and “individuals of insidious views” among us today? Yes, and they want a convention.

    But convention supporters assure us that only “moral & wise” people will be Delegates. Let’s look at that claim. There are 3 ways to select delegates:

    Congress: Does anyone trust Congress to appoint only “moral & wise” people as Delegates?

    State Legislatures: Does anyone trust State Legislatures throughout the Country to appoint only “moral & wise” people as Delegates?

    Popular Election: Does anyone trust the People to elect only “moral & wise” people as Delegates? After all, we have done such a great job in electing Presidents, people to Congress, and to our State legislatures.

    This is the most corrupt period in our history: lying - oath-breaking - baby-killing – malice dripping smearers - and responsibility shirking - are everywhere.

    And “moral & wise” people haven’t been in charge of anything for 100 years.

    The solution is to learn & enforce the Constitution we have! This one page chart illustrates it in its beauty:

  3. Rod,
    Did you attend the event? Can you give us a report?

  4. I attended the event and, while not converted, their arguments were pretty strong, the strongest being that ratification of any amendments will still require 3/4 of the states. I would also add that it was fairly run, as it was moderated by a declared skeptic, radio talk show host Phil Valentine who took questions from the audience that were discussed.
    Even so, I am with Rod and Publius Huldah in my doubts. While I'm not convinced that the COS Project is some liberal, George Soros-controlled scheme, I don't think this is some panacea though our nation's positions cries for such a quick fix as we are on a precipice. One of my biggest concerns is that as, under Article V, Congress can CALL a convention it seems quite reasonable to conclude that they can therefore control it. While there are assurances that such a convention would only be to hear proposed amendments, our own Constitution is the result of a "runaway" convention, called for the sole purpose of "revising the Articles of Confederation". Unfortunately, as PH notes, this next go-around we won't have the likes of Madison et al as delegates.