24 States have called for a Constitutional Convention and 15 others are considering it. It’s my humble opinion that the States of the Union should join together to demand a Constitutional Convention as early as possible to handle several issues that need to be addressed in order to keep our President and lawmakers in check and focused on We the People. We have to be clear and concerned about who controls the outcome of such convention if it is indeed held. As one of “We the People,” you should get acquainted with this as soon as possible so your voice can be heard.
(Please note that there is no clear constitutional provision for rescinding a State’s call for a Constitutional Convention)
A Constitutional Convention Allows the States to Amend the Constitution
Mark R Levin has written a book called, “The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic” that deserves a serious read by anyone concerned with what’s happening in America right now. We are on a gradual slope to loss of freedom, property and free speech and the only thing that is going to stop it is for the States to exercise their rights to limit Federal power.
I quote from The Liberty Amendments sales page on Amazon.com below.
“For a century, the Statists have steadfastly constructed a federal Leviathan, distorting and evading our constitutional system in pursuit of an all-powerful, ubiquitous central government. The result is an ongoing and growing assault on individual liberty, state sovereignty, and the social compact. Levin argues that if we cherish our American heritage, it is time to embrace a constitutional revival.
The delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and the delegates to each state’s ratification convention foresaw a time when—despite their best efforts to forestall it—the Federal government might breach the Constitution’s limits and begin oppressing the people. Agencies such as the IRS and EPA and programs such as Obamacare demonstrate that the Framers’ fear was prescient. Therefore, the Framers provided two methods for amending the Constitution. The second was intended for our current circumstances—empowering the states to bypass Congress and call a convention for the purpose of amending the Constitution. Levin argues that we, the people, can avoid a perilous outcome by seeking recourse, using the method called for in the Constitution itself.
The Framers adopted ten constitutional amendments, called the Bill of Rights, that would preserve individual rights and state authority. Levin lays forth eleven specific prescriptions for restoring our founding principles, ones that are consistent with the Framers’ design. His proposals—such as term limits for members of Congress and Supreme Court justices and limits on federal taxing and spending—are pure common sense, ideas shared by many. They draw on the wisdom of the Founding Fathers—including James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and numerous lesser-known but crucially important men—in their content and in the method for applying them to the current state of the nation.
Now is the time for the American people to take the first step toward reclaiming what belongs to them. The task is daunting, but it is imperative if we are to be truly free.”
It couldn’t be stated any clearer.
We the People need to take control of our federal government before it has complete control of We the People.
An article on the ACLU web site states the following:
“We’re hearing from our ACLU affiliates about a new trend in state legislatures: proposals to call for the convening of a constitutional convention. This would be a fairly radical step: although clearly provided for in the Constitution, a constitutional convention has never been convened in the history of our republic.
Many of the proposals are centered on attempts to alter the Constitution to require a federal balanced budget amendment, and in some cases to impose term limits on federal officeholders. So far we’ve heard of such proposals in Arkansas, Idaho, Nebraska, Virginia, and West Virginia. Apparently, these bills are based on a common model bill circulated by ALEC, the conservative-leaning American Legislative Exchange Council. From the other side of the political spectrum, legislatures in several states including California, Illinois, and Vermont have already called for a constitutional convention to address campaign finance issues.
Under Article V of the Constitution, there are two methods by which the Constitution can be changed. The first, which has been repeated 27 times, requires approval of a specific amendment by two-thirds of the House and Senate and three-fourths of the states. The other, never-before-used method is the convening of a convention, which Congress “shall call” upon “the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the states.” Any changes to the Constitution passed by that constitutional convention must then be approved by three fourths of the states.”
The Fox News Channel reports the following:
“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.
In the wake of the vote, California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter pressed House Speaker John Boehner on Tuesday to determine whether the states just crossed the threshold for this kind of convention. Like Michigan lawmakers, Hunter’s interest in the matter stems from a desire to push a balanced-budget amendment — something that could potentially be done at a constitutional convention.
“Based on several reports and opinions, Michigan might be the 34th state to issue such a call and therefore presents the constitutionally-required number of states to begin the process of achieving a balanced budget amendment,” Hunter wrote.
“With the recent decision by Michigan lawmakers, it is important that the House – and those of us who support a balanced budget amendment — determine whether the necessary number of states have acted and the appropriate role of Congress should this be the case.”
If two-thirds of the states indeed have applied, the ball is presumably in Congress’ court to call the convention. ”
The Main Issues The States Need to Address
The number one issue troubling We the People is the out-of-control spending by the Federal government. With deficits running in the hundreds of billions of dollars, we have very little time before out required interest payments on the debt we have are greater than the revenue we bring in. Financiers have estimated we could hit that mark within a decade if current spending trends aren’t curbed. So the first thing on the debate table is a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget.
I learned in grade school that if you constantly spend more than you bring in you end up broke and you can easily lose everything you might have. It seems to me the so-called brilliant leaders we have never went to grade school. Spend, spend, spend is all they can think of as a way to get us out of financial trouble, but it only ends up with limited immediate results and throws us further into debt which is the real problem. A constitutional amendment forcing the US government to run on a balanced budget would not only help straighten us out financially, but will curb many other issues related to overreach.
A second pressing problem regards executive orders. Our US Constitution limits power in all three branches of our government by providing checks and balances. Executive orders are being used to override Congress’ will of We the People. Just what rights does a President have before he overreaches and acts as a King or a Sovereign on his or her own? This is a major issue that needs correction. If you do a Google search on past executive orders you will, I’m sure, be shocked by the vast rights our Presidents (from both parties) have surrendered, for example, in the case of undefined “emergency.” These orders range from giving control of our military over to the United Nations to the President having the right to take whatever ‘natural resources’ he wants from We the People in the state of an emergency. While our constitution ensures checks and balances to prevent these kind of things, executive orders can easily and instantaneously bypass those checks and balances if they are not held in check. This issue needs to be addressed immediately.
There are some dozen other issues that States want addressed at a Constitutional Convention. Term limits for Congressmen would go far to eliminate the ‘pork’ in the budget as politicians would be less tempted to satisfy greedy businesses and organizations in order to keep their positions for a longer period of time. Career politicians are more apt to favor keeping their career intact than to serve We the People.
You can check online for the other issues a modern Constitutional Convention could address.
States Might Not Be Able to Control the Constitutional Convention
However there is a big question looming and that is, “Can the States control the outcome of a modern Constitutional Convention?”
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has this to say:
“ALEC and its allies assert that states can control the operations and agenda of a convention and sharply limit the actions of their delegates. But there is no consensus on this question among constitutional scholars or others who have studied the question carefully; the selective quotations that convention proponents cite from the 1780s do not reflect a consensus among the Framers of the Constitution and do not have the force of law. Even more importantly, no court or other body exists with the authority to enforce any such rules and to override the decisions of a constitutional convention.”
Source with more information: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=4165
Care has to be taken by the States to perform due diligence to make sure they can control the outcome of a modern Constitutional Convention; if they cannot then it might bring more harm than good. The preservation of our Constitution is of utmost importance; only amendments that take care of well-known issues should be proposed and passed.
Are We in the Hands of Fools?
I remember a song from my teen years called “Twentieth Century Schidzoid Man.” A verse in the song states, “I’m afraid our future lies in the hands of fools.” It sure seems that way to me as I’ve observed politicians from all over the world doing what they do. I would trust none of them with my business nor would I trust that their were truly working in my interest. Power corrupts human beings, and the love of money is indeed the root of all evil.
But we are not in the hands of fools.
There is a sovereign Creator in control of all things.
Romans 11:36 For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.
No matter what happens or does not happen, we are God’s and He is in control. Your future is as bright as the promises of God in his Word. Rest assured God our Father knows what’s going on and is guiding everything according to His predetermined will and He will complete the work He sent His Word to do.
Rejoice my friend. And in the meantime, let’s pray our States stand up against federal tyranny.
God bless you.