Texas Truth Loc: Behind Enemy Lines

12 all able-bodied welfare recipients must work for the states and earn their way.

Candace Grugel

I love all of your ideas, especially se******n over e******n of senators. Sadly, reality causes my balloon to deflate and land back onto the sad t***h that government has screwed everyone except them.

pafret Loc: Northeast

The difference lies in the fact that after an article five convention agrees on the amendments needed they still must pass through Congress with all of their requirements to become embodied in the Constitution. A constitutional convention as noted creates the Constitution whole cloth. Article five is a means of compelling Congress to consider changes on which they have refused to take action.

samtheyank

Owl! I think you mean the 17th amendment not the 16th. The 16th deals with the Income Tax. The 17th was designed to get rid of cigar smoking political bosses selecting Senators that favored their political agenda. If you have a well informed citizenry, the 17th works great. You have too many six pack Joes who would rather drink beer and watch a football game instead of taking the time to know what their local sleazy politician is doing to represent him?

pafret Loc: Northeast

This gives me another idea for an amendment. How about a state v**er initiated referendum on Congressmen. If sufficient v**es are generated within the congressman's state, any specific Representative or Senater can be recalled i.e. dismissed and new e******ns held to replace him.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

That is incorrect.

Any amendment/s proposed by 2/3rds of the state legislatures at an Article V convention CANNOT be altered, changed, rescinded, or v**ed on by the US Congress. The only role the US Congress plays in this is ministerial. Since the US Congress, as a body, represents all 50 states, its only duty is to submit the proposed amendments as written to ALL 50 state legislatures for ratification. The amendment/s become official only when 3/4ths of the state legislatures ratify them.

James Madison is responsible for adding the state convention procedure to the Article V amendment process solely for the purpose of providing the states with an alternative that eliminates any participation or influences by the US Congress.

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

So we have a Convention of States for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. I get the subsequent methodological differences, but there seems to be little real difference in calling that a Constitutional Convention also. That it is convened by the states not Congress is not reflected in the Article V text nomenclature for that convening. So it must be that lawyer types have reserved the title Constitutional Convention nomenclature for the other, original convention. Ho hum.

pafret Loc: Northeast

I am corrected. I misread an article and on rechecking I found this: "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....”

Huck Loc: The Midwest

Quitarman, The last thing anyone in their right mind should want is another convention of states. Every one of the items, except #3 can best be handled by the normal Amendment process now outlined within our Constitution. It’s a purposely slower process but the safest. There is still debate going on concerning the right of states to secede from the union. I believe many states would not have ratified the Constitution if they had any thought it was so and I believe some states constitutions have that so written. It’s wise to stay away from another Convention in this day and age – you wouldn’t recognize your country after its ratification. Huck

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

The Article V convention of states IS outlined in our constitution. It is right there in Article V.

AmChistPat651

Hmm!! Everything up thread is quite enlightening and in some cases well informed. Essentially, however, though all demonstrate a latent discontent in the established foundational Constitutional history of these great United States of America, and even though much thought has been demonstrated as well, I feel free to speak with great unambiguous authority: It is all collective mental masturbation!
Further, 228 years ago a great man named George issued a proclamation that declared it "the duty of all nations" to acknowledge God's providence, obey His will, be thankful for His blessings, and pray to Him. That's a fact people, the nation's first president called for the American people to "humbly implore His protection and favor" as well as "beseech Him to pardon our national and other t***sgressions."
So it is my contribution here, to First seek pardon; Second, in humility seek forgiveness for our nations t***sgressions as well as our own; Third, let Him guide us into the future as the Founding Fathers so faithfully did, and maybe, just maybe, America will be Great Again for another 228 plus/minus years! Semper Fi...

pafret Loc: Northeast

It can be handled but it won't be. Who is sponoring and demanding term limits amendments in Congress other than Rand Paul? How much success has he had?

Molly2399 Loc: Ohio

As a member of the Convention of States you are right on.

Huck Loc: The Midwest

I am replying to all here when I say that we can never have another convention if you like the country the way it is supposed to be now. The mischief that can be created in a convention with lawmakers of today would destroy this country as we know it. The amendment process as outlined within the Constitution is the only sound and fair way to change those areas we would like to see changed. Huck