Topic: Article V Convention
How To Look At The Article V Convention We have nothing to fear and everything to gain.by John De Herrera
(libertarian)
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Laws are written to prevent harm. The latest and greatest law to emerge from civilization is the U.S. Constitution. Those who wrote it knew what we know today--that power corrupts. And today--now--power has corrupted things in the most dangerous way: The Vote has become privatized (electronic voting machines, i.e. a private company telling us who won an election, or what initiaive passed).
If you don't have transparent elections, you don't have a free society--the two are one and the same; and if you don't have a free society, what do you have? Not much, except a ticket to slavery. So that's the bad news, we're in serious danger of losing the ultimate freedom (for humanity no less)--and not in our kid's lifetimes, or our grandkid's lifetimes, but in our own lifetime.
Those who drafted the Constitution knew there would have to be a legal mechanism to force a corrupt government to come clean, and the law written to do that is the convention clause of Article V. By holding a federal convention of state delegates, it's like getting a second opinion. The delegates, in a deliberative assembly, build consensus and then propose ideas the Republican and Democrat politicians never will.
Whatever the state delegates propose means nothing unless 38 states agree to an idea. For that many states to agree to an idea, it's going to have to be non-partisan--somethinga lotof Americans can agree on--like safe/secure/transparent voting and registration. But simply dusting off the Constitution and holding a civic ceremony on the authority ofit will make all the corrupt politicians get their act together or get ready to get squashed like a bug by the awakened giant of sovereign power that's currently looking for a place to make a stand.
In terms of political science, it's always about floating the right idea at the right time, and right now there are enough Americans from the Right and the Left upset and concerned aboutour country. So for now, all we need is a tipping-point majority (roughly twenty/thirty million Americans) aware of and talking about the convention clause of Article V.
As it turns out, a national group http://www.foavc.org, over the past ten months has discovered that all fifty states have applied to congress for the Article V Convention, yet one session of Congress after the next ignores its constitutional obligation to issue the call. In other words, we're currently mandated by our high law to come together as a nation and find out what 75% or more of us agree on. Wouldn't that be something a bit different than politics as usual? To see the whole country convene on the authority of the Constitution? It's the only thing that's going to save us.
This is not political, it's legal; this is about the rule of law, and we better get enough of us together to force the politicians to obey our law or there will be a consequence. We're already experiencing the begining of it, and the corporations are not done with us as a people. If you get informed, and let your famliy and friends know what's going on, we'll all continue to live free.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 0 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of John De Herrera only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John De Herrera is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-11-21 13:46:35
Rather than continuing your campaign of vaguely blowing smoke about how great an Article V convention would be, I think it would be a very positive change if you or others in your little band were to actually get specific. In other words, let's see some sample amendments that you want an Article V convention to approve.
Put aside all the rhetoric about how those who haven't jumped on your bandwagon aren't really patriots or don't really support the Constitution. All that stuff is merely an excuse to avoid facing the difficult task of actually framing amendments.
You want to convince people of the merits of your approach? Don't browbeat us. You "got game"? Show us what you've got. Show us the specific amendments you want passed if an Article V convention were to convene.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2009-11-21 19:35:50
Hi John,
It looks like there's been another pep rally for the promoters of the Article V debacle as evidenced by the recent spate of deceitful liberals posting pro-convention articles. Seems like you would have realized by now that few here in libertarian/conservative land are buying your ridiculous claims.
Posted By: john de herrera
Date: 2009-11-21 21:00:05
walt, here is the twenty-eighth amendment i'd like to see ratified: From here on all state and federal elections will be meet a national standard for voting and voter registration, and the Congress shall make this so.
or, Not more than twenty-five years shall pass before the Article V Convention shall be convoked from the ending of the last federal convention.
or, From the date of ratification of this amendment proposal there shall be a three-tiered flat tax: one rate for corporations, one for businesses, and one for individual citizens.
jahfre: the convention clause is a legal principle--one from which this country grew out of. they were holding conventions to build consensus out on long island almost four hundred years ago. how could convening to build consensus and propose ideas politicians won't be a debacle?
for someone to assert that a deliberative assembly of non-politicians would be a debacle only displays that persons stupidity, duplicity, or fear of being able to change their mind.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-11-22 00:23:19
National voting standard amendment: pretty vague. What standard do you have in mind? Perhaps you want Congress to set the standard? I know what they'll pick: electronic voting everywhere, Real ID-style national identification in order to vote, etc. Sure you want that? I don't.
Three-tiered flat tax: at what rates? That's a rather critical detail. And what reason do you have to believe such an amendment will pass? The majority of voters do not seem to be enthralled by flat taxes, based on how poorly flat-tax advocates have done at the polls.
You gave very few specifics in your reply, which is very disappointing. If this is your idea of selling us on the idea of an Article V convention based on what amendments you'd offer, I'd say you've struck out.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-11-22 00:42:30
Re: your comment to Jahfre: "for someone to assert that a deliberative assembly of non-politicians would be a debacle only displays that persons stupidity, duplicity, or fear of being able to change their mind."
What evidence do you have to conclude that the delegates to such an assembly would be non-politicians? The delegates would be selected by the various state legislatures (in most cases). You actually believe they're going to send non-politicians to your Article V convention to represent the various states? Calling Jahfre stupid in this context wasn't terribly bright of you.
Posted By: john de herrera
Date: 2009-11-22 10:02:56
walt, this past summer i drove from the california coast to montauk, long island, and then back. i took about ten weeks doing it. i spoke with (literally) hundreds of americans at length about the convention clause. i told them their constitution has a convention clause, that it's actually a right of the people to come together to discuss things the politicians and media do not and likely never will.
how is it 95%+ of these americans recognized the value of such a thing and recognized how such a convention would threaten corporate power? how is it all these americans recognized that but politicos like you can't? i've been advocating for the Article V Convention for several years. when i started it was still known as it was in the past--as a "constitutional convention." that term is what has traditionally been used by corporate media/press to frighten americans away from the convention clause--as if it can re-write the constitution, or as if it would be a second congress full of corrupt individuals. you appear to still cling to that too, as if such an event is going to be a bunch of politicians doing what we know congress already does day in and day out. how is it you cannot walk through, step by step, what would have to happen once the call is issued? merely holding these special elections--not run of the mill repub/dem elections--would open up discussion of ideas on how to limit the institutionalized corruption we are beset with today. how do you think candidates would have to sell themselves to the people of their state for the first Article V Convention? do you really lack the ability to imagine what that would be like? how it would revive the constitution because it's an exercise of the constitution?
i've been to many websites over the years, and have dealt with operatives time and time again who somehow cannot see the value in the legal mechanism left to us by men wrote the constitution. it's common sense what such an event would do to the political landscape. isn't it obvious that if politicians and corporate powers would benefit from a federal convention that they would have called it long ago? isn't it obvious why the state applications in the congressional record have been scattered, buried, and ignored? hasn't it ever struck you how corporate media has never discussed it other than to frighten people about it? don't those facts cause a light to go off in your head? yet those hundreds of americans i talked with this summer recognized immediately how a national convention would make the corporate powers blanch.
you and jahfre can't see that? are you playing dumb? being obtuse on purpose? brainwashed? i'm not god, i don't know the answer, but i suggest you get out of your cave and go talk with people on the street. ask them what they think of allowing the country to come togerther in a national convention in order to talk about their congress.
as to the amendment suggestions: why do i have to set the decimal point for you on a flat tax? shouldn't it be obvious how a flat tax would close loopholes and provide valuable funds?
on the voting issue, the congress has already stolen The Vote by letting a private corporation count our votes. you can't comprehend how making a standard for voting and registration will reduce the points of failure in our voting process?
re-read what bill and joel and i have written, and stop looking at it cocked-eyed. what they have said, and what i'm saying is nothing but the truth. convention of bust. not much time left.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2009-11-22 16:10:17
I can't respond just yet because I can't find a full text of the fifth amendment anywhere on the 'net. I know the full text is longer than what most websites say it is, but I can't find it, and I can't find my pocket copy of the Constitution.
Can you point me to a URL of the complete text of the fifth amendment? I'm interested in re-reading all of it, not just the summary on the copies of the Bill of Rights that the states received, and not just the excerpt on your website, but the whole, long fifth amendment.
Remember, more than half the electorate voted for Obama, who anyone with a brain could see was a socialist. At the rate congress is going, though, soon we may have nothing to lose.
Somehow, we need to effect term limits on Congress and its obvious that lifelong politicians will never allow that.
I think the whole problem with an Article 5 Convention is the lack of detail about how such a process should take place. The founders floundered on this issue and as a result they left it an open process. For example, on your site foavc, you quote 750 times the state legislatures have petitioned for a ConCon from all 50 states and that we are being denied our constitutional rights. Of course, thats been 750 total times over US History at different points in time on different subject matters and over a dozen or so times the state legislatures, have rescinded their petitions. I also don't think Hawaii has petitioned at all for a ConCon, correct me if I am wrong.
It is also not apparent if they should reach the threshold when they receive petitions from 34 states requesting an Article V convention in general or if the petition must be to address a certain subject matter. Obviously, if they receive 34 petitions from individual states over different subject matters, the point is moot. Also, the point of the ConCon as explained by Hamilton and others is to correct a recalcitrant Congress. A General ConCon doesn't clarify any grievance of the people or why it is needed or why it can't be done by an elected US Congress. It opens the door for a circus on issues that may not even be of national concern. If they receive 34 petitions for an Amendment on Congressional Term Limits for instance, then obviously that is entirely different and should be upheld. Most of the times in our history its been used as a flexing of muscle by the states when a ConCon has been threatened, thats when the US Congress usually ends up passing the Amendment at question in order to avoid a ConCon.
Posted By: john de herrera
Date: 2009-11-24 01:25:09
randy, you think anyone should've seen obama was this or that. i think people have been dumbed down and brainwashed and haven't yet been persuaded to look deeply at the situation. you think the process is vaugue as to what takes place. it's not, look at the faq link at foavc.org. you think the founders floundered. they didn't. they did not put any stricture on the calling of a convention because they knew people in power would attempt to prevent one. why? because it threatens their power. you think applications ought to be same-subject and/or contemporeaneous. no. since the convention is simply the proposal of ideas, and nothing goes beyond that until 38 states agree to any one of them, indeed the founders knew exactly the right way to write the law regarding them.
what i have a problem with is how you think you can question what our constitution says. i don't question it. i think it's perfect the way it is. it's obvious to me what we need and that's to dust off the constitution and put it to work. the delegates will come together, propose ideas, and go home. just that process of holding elections for delegates and the delegates convening will do exactly what the constitution was designed to: provide a balance of power to a runaway government.
whether you like it or not, according to the rule of law the Article V Convention is curretnly mandated. i hope you can consider things more closely. in the end, as mentioned, we have a private corporation counting votes. if you don't have transparent elections, you don't have a free society. and if you don't have that, then what the [beep] are you going on about? do you understand where we are as a people? the voting process has been compromised. we in fact have nothing to lose now. nothing. yet everything to gain. please think about how you're looking at where we are. it's convention or bust. it really is.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
