Why
Michigan should NOT ask Congress to call an Article V convention, a/k/a
“constitutional convention,” or in Newspeak, a “convention of states.”
Why
Michigan Legislators should vote “No!” on HB 6523 (delegate bill), HJR V, SJR R
and all applications asking Congress to call an Article V Convention
1.
Article
V provides that if two thirds of the States apply for it, Congress shall call a
convention for proposing Amendments to the US Constitution. However, Delegates
would have the right, as recognized in the 2nd paragraph of our Declaration of
Independence (DOI), to throw off the Constitution we have and write a new
constitution which creates a new government.
• Our only precedent for an “amendments
convention” is the Federal Convention of 1787 which was called by the
Continental Congress “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles
of Confederation” (AOC). But the Delegates ignored Congress’s limiting
instructions (and the limiting instructions from their States) and wrote a new
Constitution – the one we have now.
• Furthermore, the new Constitution had a new
and easier mode of ratification. Whereas Amendments to the AOC had to be approved
by the Continental Congress and all of the then 13 States, the new Constitution
provided at Article VII that it would be ratified by only 9 States. A third
constitution could provide for ratification by national referendum instead of ¾
of the States!
• In Federalist No. 40 (15th para), James
Madison invoked the Delegates’ “transcendent and precious right” to alter or
abolish our form of government, as recognized in the DOI, to justify ignoring
their instructions and drafting a new Constitution which created a new
government.
• James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were
Delegates to the “amendments convention” of 1787 and had personal knowledge
that Delegates can’t be controlled. That’s why Madison trembled at the prospect
of an Article V convention; Hamilton dreaded one; and future Chief Justice John
Jay said another convention would run “extravagant risques.”
2.
The
Convention of States Project (COSP) implicitly acknowledges the danger of a
convention when they say state legislatures should pass “unfaithful delegate”
laws which they claim will control Delegates. But such laws can’t control
Delegates because:
• The DOI recognizes that a People have the
self-evident right to throw off their form of government and set up a new one.
We can’t stop Delegates from exercising self-evident rights!
• Since Congress “calls” the convention, they
have traditionally claimed the power to determine the number and selection
process for Delegates. See the April 11, 2014 Report of the CRS (p.4). Congress
may appoint themselves as Delegates. Nothing requires Congress to permit States
to participate in the convention! publiushuldah@gmail.com 113018
• Delegates wouldn’t be under state control. An
Article V convention is not a state function. The convention would be a federal
convention called by Congress to perform the federal function of addressing a
federal constitution.
• As Sovereign Representatives of The People,
Delegates would have sovereign immunity for what they do at a convention. Art.
I, § 6, cl.1 of the US Constitution, and state constitutions recognize that
legislators have immunity. The CRS Report (pg. 37) shows that Delegates to an
Article V convention will have immunity.
• James Madison’s Journal of the Federal
Convention of 1787 shows that on May 29, 1787, the Delegates voted to make the
proceedings secret. If Delegates today decide to meet in secret or vote by
secret ballot, the states would never know who did what. The American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) writes model Art. V convention legislation
and is experienced at holding secret meetings with state legislators from which
the Press is barred by armed guards.
• Delegates, as Sovereign Representatives of
the People, are not answerable to state legislatures (which are “mere
creatures” of the state constitutions) or to Congress (which is a “mere
creature” of the federal Constitution). The Delegates have the power to
eliminate the federal and state governments –precisely what the proposed
Constitution for the Newstates of America does.
3.
COSP
says their application doesn’t ask Congress to call a “constitutional
convention,” but rather, a “convention of states” which falsely implies it is
controlled by the states. COSP has fooled some legislators into believing they
can be against a “constitutional convention” (where our existing Constitution
can be replaced); and yet support an “Article V convention” which COSP has
redefined as a “convention of states” controlled by state legislators. But
there’s no such thing in the Constitution! COSP made it up!
4. The Constitution we
have delegates only a few powers to the fed. gov’t. But for 100 years, everyone
has ignored the existing limitations. We can’t fix federal usurpations of
non-delegated powers with Amendments, because Amendments can’t take away powers
the Constitution doesn’t grant!
5. Those behind the
push for a convention have another agenda & they need a convention to get
it done. 3
Endnotes:
1 None of the Delegates to the federal convention of 1787 said the purpose of
an Art. V convention is to enable States to get amendments to the Constitution
in order to remedy violations of the Constitution by the fed. gov’t. COSP
fabricated that claim! See: What the Framers really said about the purpose of
amendments to our Constitution. Furthermore, our Framers knew the People had
the right to meet in convention and draft a new Constitution whether or not the
convention method was added to Art. V; and they couldn't stop People in the
future from doing what they had just done. Most likely, the convention method
was included in Art. V to induce Anti-federalists to support the new
Constitution. 2 Four US Supreme Court Justices and other luminaries have warned
that an Article V convention is fraught with peril. 3 George Soros wants a
Marxist constitution in place by 2020. Globalists want us in the North American
Union. The proposed Newstates Constitution establishes a dictatorship and is
easily ratified via national referendum (Art. XII, §1)
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment