Questioning an Article V Convention

by Jay Stang, Texas Oath Keepers Executive Vice-President and member of our Board of Directors

Captian America
Questioning an Article V Convention
Oath Keepers
Oath Keepers

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Fellow Oath Keepers,

The Constitution provides us several avenues to amend, or change it. The avenue most Americans are familiar with is the amendment. The least known, until now, is the convention, also identified in Article V.

The convention, known in this day as the Convention of the States (CoS), would be convened for the purpose of proposing amendments. Is there anything else that could happen? I can't say for sure, but consider this: if the US Government had any chance of ridding itself of the chains that Jefferson prescribed, do you think it would take the chance? Any way to rid itself formally of the Bill of Rights?

Who would be sent to this Convention?

Remember, if the Article V machinery is sent into motion, think about who will control it? Our current federal government? How many times have you been frustrated with the failure of congressional leadership in both houses to uphold their oaths, or to put our interests first?

Guess what? They'll be forming and planning the convention. Uh oh. There are several pieces of state legislation in the Texas Legislature right now to specify delegates, how they are selected, their qualifications, etc. That sounds great on paper, doesn't it? Will the delegates faithfully execute the charter given them by the various state legislatures around the country?

What did the delegates to the last convention do? Here is the exhausting detail in which the convention is described.

Article V:

“The Congress…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;…”

That's it. That's all the Constitution says regarding the convention. It doesn't say what they are allowed to talk about, or not allowed to talk about. Congress doesn't get any guidance on how to run it.

What if they throw out the whole Constitution? Is it possible? Do you trust John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and President Obama?

Why do we need a CoS? To pass a balanced budget amendment? Would that solve our problems? One more law, one more amendment? Does the federal government follow the Constitution now? If not, why not?

Declaration of Independence
Friends, the Constitution was created for a moral and religious people. It is unsuited for the governing of any other.

Friends, the Constitution was created for a moral and religious people. It is unsuited for the governing of any other. Why? Moral and religious people govern themselves. They don't need an all powerful government to do it for them. With no integrity or ethics, the Constitution is merely an eloquent collection of words on paper. It has no magic power. No soul. The Constitution is only as good as the people who follow it. It is not the laws on the books that matter; it is the law in our hearts that matters. If we can not govern ourselves, someone else will. Nature abhors a vacuum.

Please ponder these questions as you decide whether to support or oppose the Convention of the States.

Just remember this: when people tell you not to worry, that's when you should start.

Jay Stang

About Oath Keepers:
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our Oath is to the Constitution. www.oathkeepers.org

  • 18
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    16 Comment threads
    2 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    16 Comment authors
    BrianJ T AndersSumnerA L CooperLark Chad Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    Brian
    Guest
    Brian

    Imagine all the people fighting for a Con-Con fighting to get these crooked bastards out first!

    3. The most promising method of securing a virtuous and morally stable people is to elect virtuous leaders.

    J T Anders
    Guest
    J T Anders

    Golly, what if we actually enforced the US Constitution as it stands and repealed all the laws, executive orders, regulations and bureaucracies that violate it?

    Sumner
    Guest
    Sumner

    “There is one exception, which is that Congress could simply proceed to pass the amendment themselves rather than submit to the convention. The result would therefore be the same. There is precedent for this since the seventeenth amendment was passed in this manner.”

    IIRC, even when congress passed the amendment, it still had to be approved the states.

    A L Cooper
    Guest
    A L Cooper

    We don’t need another convention.

    Jim Greaves
    Guest
    Jim Greaves

    The U. S. Constitution is not the problem. Amending it is not the solution.

    David Farrar
    Guest
    David Farrar

    I also would further add to the presidential clause a prohibition against any “natural born Citizen” who has not held, and completed, at least one term as an elected public official, starting at least at the statewide election level and upwards, from running for President of the United States.

    Street survivor
    Guest
    Street survivor

    Article V Convention,is a dangerous wolf in sheep’s clothing. The powers that be , would finish off the Bill of Rights. As Bush # 2 tore up the U.S. Constitution with the 9/11 ,Patriot Act. His own words. As the John Birch Society says it would destroy America .

    Bandit
    Guest
    Bandit

    Our current Constitution worked well enough for the last 235 plus years, and now they want to have another CoS, you can bet that more than a few in that deal will want to remove a few of the current amendments as well and you can bet the first one they will go after is the 2nd and then the 1st. You can also bet that bamba boy will have both of his feet in on it as well. as stated the current constitution worked well enough for the last 235 plus years, do we really need to change it… Read more »

    Das Wolfbilly
    Guest
    Das Wolfbilly

    It appears they are selective with allowing comments to appear. They have allowed comments by ignorant supporters of their ignorant position. That should be a violation of facebook ethics. . . . ???

    ts.atomic
    Guest
    ts.atomic

    Sure they could propose the repeal of the bill of rights. They could propose an amendment to codify political-correctness and make “offending” a protected class of citizen punishable by burning at the stake. They could propose any number of lib-nut, big govt, tyranical amendments. They could *propose* them. It takes 38 states in agreement to *ratify* them. Find 38 states that you think would agree to repeal the bill of rights or any other bat-crap crazy idea. Now find 38 states that would ratify proposed amendments that would remove all doubt about the 2nd Amendment, or leash/abolish the current IRS,… Read more »

    Darren
    Guest
    Darren

    Just as the first federal convention was supposed to tweak the Articles of Confederation but instead gave us this failed CONstitution, a 2nd convention would only result in a new document further empowering tyranny. By tyranny I mean govt. Things are bad enough under this CONstitution that hasn’t worked. Don’t open the door to an even worse situation.

    Susan
    Guest
    Susan

    An Article V gives the citizens and their State Legislature the tools to reign in an oppressive government, as we have now. Congress is NOT included other than to Call the place and time, that’s all. Our State Leaders have the ability to take our country back to it’s original intent by adding Amendments to the Constitution, NOT change the Constitution. See the Assembly of State Legislators to find out the process of an Amending Convention and how it will work after each State has selected their delegates for the Convention. I welcome the opportunity to put restrictions on the… Read more »

    Paul Adcock
    Guest
    Paul Adcock

    First of all, I know that they needed all 13 states to call the Philadelphia Convention (later called the Constitutional Convention). All 13 agreed that the scope of the convention would be to replace the clearly deficient Articles of Confederation. They also all agreed that 9 states would be needed to ratify what came out of that convention. 9 states ratified it. Here, we’d need 38 states to ratify anything so the “whole new constitution” argument would only happen if 38 states allowed it anyway, which ISN’T going to happen, and, if it were, we’re already lost and your point… Read more »

    Das Wolfbilly
    Guest
    Das Wolfbilly

    This lacks any serious study of the Constitutional Law and the historical precedents governing an assembly of the two-thirds of states to propose amendments limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal bureaucracy. Representatives, generally referred to as commissioners are sent by each state with instructions on that states proposals. When a majority of those states have decided upon an amendment to propose, ie; fiscal restraints, term limits, etc.,it is properly written to avoid any misinterpretation and then sent to the three-fourths of the states for ratification. The founders included this requirement which they understood would avoid anything which might… Read more »

    David Farrar
    Guest
    David Farrar

    I would also hope such an Article V “clarification” would be undertaken to clearly define, as a presidential qualification, the term: ‘natural born Citizen’ inserted into Art. II §I Cl. 5. To this end, I can find no better example of this definition than the one offered by John Bingham in the 1866 Civil Rights Act: ‘A person born not subject to a foreign power.’ I would further add at the risk of being redundant: ‘A person born not subject to a foreign power, with one allegiance, and only one allegiance, and that allegiance is to support and abide by… Read more »

    Lark Chad
    Guest
    Lark Chad

    Farris, Natelson, and Meckler over at CoS and selling Snake Oil, there IS NO supporting ‘statute or case’ law that supports their premises. their argument all boils down to ‘trust me’ ‘I can fix that…’ uhh – not very convincing. Mark Levin’s book Liberty Amendments written to sway people who are unhappy with BIG Government not following the Constitution, with overwhelming citations supposedly pointing toward the legitimacy of his claim, is more an exercise in ‘historical fiction’.

    David Farrar
    Guest
    David Farrar

    “The true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest and best . . . (for) when all government . . . shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as . . . oppressive as the government from which we separated.” –Thomas Jefferson Each state will decide for themselves how they will select their own delegates to an Article V convention. If we fail to hold an Article V convention to address the obvious fulfillment of Jefferson’s prophetic vision, we will… Read more »

    Jay Stang
    Guest
    Jay Stang

    I appreciate the repost, and also using Captain America as the header picture.