Some people claim that a Convention of States is the only way to reign in an out-of-control government in Washington, D.C. Others warn that such a convention could overturn the Constitution. Which of them is right? What is a Convention of States? What powers would such a convention have, and what role does Congress have in the convention? These are all questions the American people should be asking. With more states calling for a convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution, let’s take a dive into the Convention of States and see if we can answer these questions. Amending the Constitution The Constitution provides two methods for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States: One, is by Congress, and one is by the States. Congress can propose amendments by passing a resolution with a twothirds majority in each house. To date, no amendment to the Constitution has been proposed by the states. However, there are those who wish to change that. or, Two, on the Application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments. U.S. Constitution, Amendment V When two-thirds of the state legislatures ask for it, Congress shall call a convention for proposing amendments. It’s extremely important to remember these are methods for proposing amendments, not for actually amending the Constitution. That requires the states to act. So, the process is simple, Either Congress proposes amendments or the states request that Congress call a convention for proposing amendments, but any proposed amendments would only become part of the Constitution if threefourths of the states ratify it. Why did the framers give us two methods of proposing amendments? Because, if you remember, the Constitution is a compact between the states. If only Congress had the authority to propose amendments to the Constitution, then the parties to the compact would be unable to rein in an out-ofcontrol federal government. Does anyone really think that Congress will ever propose a balanced budget or other amendments that restrict their powers? So why are some people so adamant that we need a Convention of States, while others are so vehemently opposed to it? I believe that answer will come if we take a deeper look into what we could expect if such a convention is eventually called. Let’s start with the arguments for and against a Convention of States. The Good and the Bad Washington, D.C., is broken. The federal government is spending this country into the ground, seizing power from the states and taking liberty from the people. It’s time American citizens took a stand and made a legitimate effort to curb the power and jurisdiction of the federal government. The Founders gave us a tool to fix Washington, D.C. We must use it before it is too late. There are a few amendments I would like to see proposed to the states. I’m sure you have some ideas yourself. I’m also pretty sure that we don’t agree on all of them. If we cannot get Congress to propose these ideas, why not call a Convention of States where our ideas can be better heard? The John Birch Society is adamantly against a Convention of States, or a “Con-Con” as they call it. Their main concern seems to be a “runaway convention”. The John Birch Society seem to gloss over one important part. The Convention can merely propose amendments, it cannot change the Constitution by itself. If a Convention submits a balanced budget amendment or even a completely new Constitution, it wouldn’t take effect unless three-fourths of the states ratify it. There is another actor in this Convention of States we need to look into: Congress. Article V states the Congress must call a convention when two-thirds of the state legislatures apply for one. But is that all Congress will do? The Role of Congress in the Article V Convention The state legislatures are indispensable actors in the Article V Convention process—nothing can happen unless 34 or more apply for one. Congress is equally indispensable to the process by which a convention is summoned, convened, and defined. The Constitution, with characteristic economy of phrase, simply directs that “Congress … on the application of the Legislatures of twothirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for the proposing of Amendments….” Beyond this language, however, observers have identified subsidiary issues for consideration by Congress, of which five may be among the most important: • What is the overall role of Congress in the convention process? Would it call a convention and then stand aside, or would it be the “guardian” of a convention? • More specifically, what is Congress’s obligation under Article V to call a convention if it receives sufficient state applications? • What sort of convention does Article V authorize? • If an Article V Convention proposes an amendment or amendments, does Congress have any discretion as to whether they must be submitted to the states for consideration? • What is the constitutional status of an Article V Convention? Even though the Constitution gives no such role to it, Congress seems to believe they should be deeply involved in the convention process. In addition to the Constitution, Congress also believes it can use recent precedent and their own staff to come up with ways to meddle with the convention. Lost in this discussion is the fact that, since no such power was specifically delegated to the United States, much less Congress, any attempt to exercise such power would not only be a violation of their oath of office, but theft. Amendment X “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.” So where does that leave us on the question of the Convention of States? Again, we should start by answering a few questions. • Is a Convention of State constitutional? Absolutely. Article V clearly says that the states can request a convention, and when two-thirds of their legislatures do so, Congress shall call a convention. Was the convention designed to allow states to propose amendments that Congress would not? Yes again. Are there amendments to the Constitution that should be considered to rein in an out-of-control federal government? Most definitely yes. Could such a convention propose an entirely new Constitution? Yes, but it would still take ratification by the states. • Would a Convention of States fix Washington, D.C.? Well, there’s the rub. Washington, D.C. routinely ignores the Constitution as written. What makes people think that they won’t simply ignore any new amendments? I even had one supporter of the Convention of States tell me that Congress may ignore that Constitution, but they wouldn’t ignore any amendment. That statement is plainly laughable. All three branches of the government in Washington, D.C. routinely violate most, if not all, of the amendments to the Constitution. And if the report from the Congressional Research Service is any guide, Congress will ignore the Constitution as soon as a convention is called. So, if a Convention of States is not a solution, is all lost? No. Most of the problems we find in Washington, D.C. is not a fault in the Constitution, but in our unwillingness to enforce it. Many of the amendments that the Convention of States Action calls for are already covered by the existing Constitution. • Require members of Congress to live under the same laws they pass for the rest of us (Amendment X). • Impose limits on federal spending and/or taxation (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1). • Get the federal government out of our healthcare system (Amendment X). • Get the federal government out of our education system (Amendment X). • Stop unelected federal bureaucrats from imposing regulations (Article I, Section 1, Clause 1). • Remove the authority of the federal government over state energy policy (Amendment X). • Force the federal government to honor its commitment to return federal lands to the states (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17). So, before we go trying to change the Constitution, maybe we should try enforcing it first. At least then any changes we might make would be more than just the sound of our own voice. Paul Engel The Sun Bay Paper Page 23 February 25, 2022 - March 3, 2022 Political Ineptness Cannot Be Cured by a Convention of States
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjA2ODE3