STOP HJR2 & HJR14

[Mahonri]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Utah-Choo ... 1376488701" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


There are two basic areas that make these bills bad bills that need to be opposed by all lovers of liberty.

1. Con Con’s are dangerous to our form of government. Precedence as well as the understanding of our elected officials makes a Con Con today a sure way to make us officially a socialist/fascist nation.
2. The bills misdiagnose the problem and create a solution that actually makes things worse than they are now, as hard as that may be to believe.

It is quite ironic that the namesake of the organization promoting these bad bills was also opposed to a Con Con.

“(I am) totally opposed (to a Constitutional Convention).... We may wind up with a Constitution so far different from that we have lived under for two hundred years that the Republic might not be able to continue.”
Barry Goldwater


Con Con’s are dangerous

The Constitution can be amended in two ways. The only method that has been used since 1787 requires an amendment to be proposed in Congress, then a “yes” vote from two thirds of both the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate must be obtained, followed by ratification (approval) by three quarters of the States before an amendment to our Constitution becomes part of our Constitution. This procedure is reasonably safe and addresses only one proposed amendment at a time.

The other way to amend our Constitution is through a Constitutional Convention, also called an Article V Convention, or for short a “Con-con.” In this case, when two thirds (34) of the State legislatures apply to Congress to hold a Constitutional Convention for the purpose of proposing Amendments to the Constitution, the Congress convenes the convention for “proposing amendments” to our Constitution. Then, the proposed amendments that are designed by that Convention of the 50 States will be sent to the States, either state conventions or State Legislatures, for ratification. Once ratified proposed amendments become amendments and are thus part of our Constitution.

Let us consider briefly why a Constitutional Convention can be more dangerous than the two State Representatives believe it to be. While Article V of our Constitution authorizes State Legislatures to apply for a Convention that is the extent of power the States are recognized as having in the process.

Although State Legislatures may ask for a Constitutional Convention, they have no control over it. In 1787, when the last such convention was assembled, the delegates from the State Legislatures were assigned to amend the Articles of Confederation, but instead they wrote an entirely new Constitution for a new government! That convention was called a “runaway convention.” Imagine a “runaway convention” with delegates from 50 states today designing a new government or giving us dozens of amendments that could even change our Bill of Rights and you can see the unpredictable nature of such a Con-con.

Article V of the Constitution gives the States NO power to:
- Decide the topics that will be considered, or to limit the convention to one topic or Amendment. The State Legislature may suggest to its delegates topics, but that’s no guarantee what will be discussed at the convention or proposed. One Utah Reporter (Peg Mcentee of the Salt Lake Tribune 12-27-10) already suggested changes could be proposed for “clarifying” the 2nd Amendment.
- Decide who the delegates will be to the convention or how many delegates a state will have, or how they will be chosen.
- No power to write the amendments that will be proposed as delegates may write their own once there at the convention.
- The States have No power to object to the internal proceedings or withdraw from the convention if it doesn’t do what they hoped it would do.
-
Congress is delegated power by the Constitution to:
- Decide where the convention will be held.
- Decide how many delegates each state will get. Will States have as many votes as they have delegates? No one knows.
- Decide how proposed amendment s will be ratified, by either State Legislatures or by special state conventions assembled for that purpose, very unpredictable situation.

For more details on why a Con Con is dangerous, watch our video, “Beware of Article V” at this link http://www.viddler.com/explore/VeritasL ... /videos/7/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and our article “States should enforce, not revise the Constitution” here http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/fre ... n/download" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The amendments being proposed are just bad ideas that misdiagnose the problem

Even IF (and that is a HUGE “if”) the convention is limited to a single subject, all of the proposed amendments are horrible ideas. All of them misdiagnose the problem, blaming the Constitution for our problems. The sad thing is, these people that are blaming the Constitution, purport to be the strongest defenders of the Constitution. The Constitution is NOT the problem; the fact that we ignore it IS the problem. Our demand for bigger and bigger government is the problem. Our lack of holding elected officials accountable is the problem. Our State Legislators failure to enforce the Constitution is the problem. These amendments address the symptoms and NOT the disease.

HJR2 calls for an amendment saying that if 3/4ths of the states vote to repeal a law it is no longer in force. This is a misdiagnosis of the problem. Why are these people blaming the Constitution, when if the Constitution was followed, the budget would automatically be balanced? If the Constitution is ignored now, is adding a couple of more words to it really going to make them obey it all of the sudden? The solution is in the document they seek to change. The Tenth amendment gives them the power to nullify unconstitutional law already, WITHOUT having to wait for 3/4ths of the States to go along with it.


HJR14 calls for an amendment to make it so if congress wanted to increase the debt, they would have to get approval from a “majority” of the legislators of the separate states.

Again, this this is a misdiagnosis of the problem. Why are these people blaming the Constitution, when if the Constitution was followed, the budget would automatically be balanced? If the Constitution is ignored now, is adding a couple of more words to it really going to make them obey it all of the sudden?

This takes us further away from being a Republic and closer to being a Democracy, saying that as long as the majority agree with spending like drunken sailors, it is OK, Constitutional authority be damned!

This is one of the most dangerous idea “supporters” of the Constitution have come up with yet.
The solution is again found in the document they seek to change. Follow Article 1 Section 8 and there would be no need to increase the debt.

Something in common

Something all of the bills have in common is the supposed safety switch to “ensure” that these calls for a convention do not result in a run-away convention that could destroy our form of government. However, many of the delegates to the original convention were given similar charges, and we all know how “binding” those limitations were; they were not at all binding, and were completely ignored. Also, once a convention is called, there is no “un calling” it.


No matter how you look at it, these bills are BAD on every level.

I hope that everyone will join the facebook page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Utah-Choo ... 1376488701" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; to get all the documentation, talking points, action items and everything else you will need to fight these horribly dangerous bills.