The Article V Convention is being talked about in every corner of the Republic! Here's the latest...
Rob Natelson comes to the conclusion that Article V is our only way out.
Rep. Louie Gohmert promotes Article V On House Floor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqStgReNu8Y
Sign the "We Refuse" petition for civil disobedience and to call Art. V
http://www.werefuse.com/
Randy Barnett in WaPo says Art. V may be needed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/19/AR2010031901470.html
Candidates for Congress campaign on calling Art. V
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/natelson1.1.1.html
Article V Convention has its own FaceBook Page
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Article-V-Convention-Now/272885644305
Lonely Conservative blog promotes Article V
http://www.lonelyconservative.com/2010/03/23/time-for-an-article-v-convention/
Axis of Right concludes Article V may be our only tool
http://axisofright.com/2010/03/24/an-article-v-convention/
Article V "I LOVE this last option" Opines RedState
http://www.redstate.com/realquiet/2010/03/23/the-three-roads-to-repeal/
Liberals at FireDog Lake are HORRIFIED of Article V (as they should be)
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/37148
NJ Bloggers for Article V!
http://www.gopusanj.com/wordpress/?p=11817&cpage=1
Typical: Talk Radio Mafia fans think Article V is as evil as Obama-give 'em a browser window full
http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/2476912/posts?page=68
Nutmeg State Conservatives are all in for Article V
http://nutmeg-state-conservative.blogspot.com/
What an event this will be! We have confirmed the following guests to serve of the discussion panel. The event will be hosted by Sirius-XM Talk Show Host Mike Church. Mike is the Writer, Director, Producer and Narrator of the Documentaries "The Road to Independence", "The Fame of Our Fathers" and the "Spirit of '76-Writing & Ratifying the U.S. Constitution"
Dr. Kevin Gutzman - New York time Best Selling Author "Who Killed the Constitution"- JD, PhD
Bruce Fein - Former Associate Deputy Attorney General, writer and scholar currently serving at the American Freedom Agenda
Randy E. Barnett - Georgetown University Law Center - Author "Restoring the Lost Constitution: the Presumption of Liberty"
Rep. Susan Lynn Representative to Tennessee's 57th District for the 103, 104, 105 and 106th Meetings of the TN. House
Tony Blankley - Washington Times Editorial Page Editor, CNN Political Commentator, Author "American Grit"
to name a few.......
ObamaCare is now the "Law of the land" so we can move on to the next phase of stopping it: amending the Constitution. There are 2 methods at our disposal the first is to wait for Congress to craft the amendment repealing ObamaCare the second is for 2/3 of the State Legislatures to call for a convention to propose such amendments. On 9 April, 2010 we will convene a meeting to explore this option "A meeti8ng to discuss the causes and remedies to our federal crisis."
You will hear that Article V is dangerous in the hands of the states. Please consider what Article V has resulted in in the hands of Congress. And lest anyone be lobbied to believe that "The Founding Fathers did not intend for the States and the people to use this power, i present the history of the Article as recorded in James Madison's notes of the Federal Convention.
First, Article V as drafted by the "Committee of Stile and Substance" was presented to the delegates on 12 September, 1787, it read...
V. "The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem necessary, or on the application of two-thirds25 of the legislatures of the several states, shall propose amendments to this constitution, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part thereof, when the same shall have been ratified by three-fourths at least of26 the legislatures27 of the several states, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress: Provided, that no amendment which may be made prior to the year 1808 shall in any manner affect the 28th and 29th sections of the article."
George Mason, didn't like what he heard and rose to raise his objections.
"[It] would be improper to require the consent of the Natl. Legislature, because they may abuse their power, and refuse their consent on that very account. No amendments of the proper kind would ever be obtained by the people, if the Government should become oppressive
When the delegates adjourned Mason took on the task of writing objections to this article and others. When business resumed on Saturday, 15 September, 1787 Mason made his move. Here is how Madison recorded the transaction.
Col: Mason thought the plan of amending the Constitution exceptionable & dangerous. As the proposing of amendments is in both the modes to depend, in the first immediately, and in the second, ultimately, on Congress, no amendments of the proper kind would ever be obtained by the people, if the Government should become oppressive, as he verily believed would be the case.8
Mr. Govr. Morris & Mr. Gerry moved to amend the article so as to require a Convention on application of ⅔ of the Sts
Mr Madison did not see why Congress would not be as much bound to propose amendments applied for by two thirds of the States as to call a call a Convention on the like application. He saw no objection however against providing for a Convention for the purpose of amendments, except only that difficulties might arise as to the form, the quorum &c. which in Constitutional regulations ought to be as much as possible avoided.
The motion of Mr. Govr Morris and Mr. Gerry was agreed to nem: con
Thus Article V was amended nem con- nemene contradecente Latin for "Without Objection". The Founding Fathers then, by unanimous vote, left the power to amend the Constitution should Congress become oppressive in the hands of the State Legislatures and thus the people.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
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, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Working closely with Kevin Gutzman, we present this Brief outline of suggested amendments to our distinguished panel and to the esteemed men and women in attendance and watching or listening across the United States.
1) Make clear that the Interstate Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8 empowers Congress only to regulate COMMERCE that is INTERSTATE (as the Supreme Court recognized before 1937);
2) Empower individual taxpayers and state governments to bring suit for injunctive relief in case Congress exceeds the bounds of its powers, as clarified by this amendment (lawyers call this giving individuals and states standing to sue for injunctive relief) and declare that these questions are justiciable (not "political questions" that the federal courts should dodge);
3) Make clear that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is about nothing other than Due Process in judicial proceedings -- that is, that it doesn't give federal courts power to invent rights unknown to the ratifiers and does not make the federal Bill of Rights enforceable by federal judges against the states;
4) Repeal the 17th Amendment *and* give the state legislatures the power of recall over US senators (and thus give state legislatures a check on Congress's tendency to usurp state legislative authority);
5) Require a balanced federal budget except in time of war declared by Congress;
6) Empower state legislatures to overturn federal judges' constitutional decisions. This could be done by saying that if 2/3 of legislatures vote to do so, it is done, or in some other way.
No comments:
Post a Comment