Tomorrow the General Assembly votes on legislation for Virginia to call for an Article V Constitutional Convention. They should vote NO.[read_more]
Many of our long-time conservative leaders and rank-and-file activists across Virginia strongly oppose this — Senator Dick Black, Delegate Bob Marshall, Pat McSweeney, Campaign for Liberty, National Association of Gun Rights (NAGR), Phylis Schafly – just to name a few.
But clearly there are some key conservatives supporting the ConCon.
Although I have no doubt those promoting this idea have the best of intentions, I urge you to contact your Delegate and State Senator to encourage them to vote NO.
I am convinced this isn’t just a bad idea – it’s a very bad idea.
Here’s why.
Our Problem is political, not legal or constitutional.
All conservatives agree our Republic is in serious trouble, and headed in a very bad direction. We must save it. The question is how.
Let me be clear: our problem is a political one, and the ONLY way we will fix it is winning politically. That means making the Republican Party a true reform party. That means winning Party posts, and nominations and elections with reform candidates committed to bold action to save the Republic.
There is no substitute. There is no silver bullet. It will take time and a lot of effort.
There is no easy, elegant solution that allows us to sit on the sidelines or in ivory towers. (including putting our hopes in a risky ConCon).
Some ConCon advocates argue that the fix for our Republic is revising the language of the Constitution, to stop liberal Federal and Supreme Court rulings, and to roll-back unconstitutional Federal legislation. In their arguments, the Courts and legislators are apparently “confused” by the wording of the Constitution. In ConCon thinking, if we only make the Constitution clearer, Federal judges would be forced to start interpreting the Constitution as the Founders intended, and the President and liberal members of Congress would find their legislation overturned by new judicial fiat (the other way).
It can sound tempting, but …
News Flash: There is nothing wrong with our Constitution. In fact, the left has been seeking to re-write it for the better part of century. They would LOVE the opportunity of a Constitutional Convention to get that chance.
The left sees an Article V Convention as the means to roll back gun rights, and to limit political speech.
The left opposes the Founders’ real intent. They’ve gotten around that pesky Constitution by winning elections – with both Democrats and sadly some weak Republicans – who, over time, have stacked the courts with leftists that routinely distort or outright ignore the strict words of our sacred document.
That won’t change by tightening the wording of the Constitution – because they are ignoring those words now anyway.
The only way we are going to turn this around is replacing Federal legislators, the President and ultimately the judges with strict constitutionalists.
And you can’t do that by changing the Constitution.
Dangers of a Con-Con: GOP-control of State Legislatures Doesn’t Equate to a Con-Con of Federalists.
I’ve heard the election math on this. It goes, “so a majority of the state legislatures are Republican. These Republican legislatures would select the delegates to the ConCon and vote to ratify anything that came out of it. No worries, it takes only 13 states to block anything bad.”
Let’s be honest. Even though we are conservative Republicans, and support the Republican Party as the best vehicle to save the Republic, can we really count on these current bodies to send solid Founder-types to a ConCon?
If our Republican legislatures are all so “limited-Government”, why did so many of those GOP-controlled states accept Federal ObamaCare Medicaid dollars, contributing to a massive Federal debt ? And why did our GOP-controlled Virginia General Assembly just pass the biggest tax hike in the Commonwealth’s history in 2013, expanding our state Government ?
Many of these Republicans unfortunately LIKE big government and the spending that goes with it. There is no guarantee they will send true conservatives as delegates to a Con-Con.
For example, who would Virginia send as it’s ConCon Delegate? House Speaker Bill Howell or Senate Majority Leader Tommy Norment (each of whom was elected by majorities of Republicans in their respective caucuses)?
And would these ConCon Delegates and GOP legislators be beyond the influence of a massive George Soros $1B advertising campaign to exert influence on them and their constituents, to get what the left wanted in this or a future ConCon?
In the interest of “fairness,” I can easily see current Congressional Republican leadership capitulating and allowing the ConCon to consider other things.
I hear the pro-ConCon arguments that a Convention Call by Congress to a ConCon could be crafted so that only a specific amendment we conservatives want could be considered. Are we 100% sure about this? I am no lawyer or Constitutional scholar, but I read in Article V language like, “Congress … shall call a convention for proposing amendments which … shall be valid for all intents and purposes.” This sounds pretty broad to me, and I’d think any liberal judge would jump to interpret it that way. Can we really ensure we don’t see from the ConCon floor a proposal to add the words, “except in the case of reasonable state regulation,” after “shall not be infringed” in Amendment 2 of the Constitution?
Political Momentum on our side and Danger of Distraction
I hear frequently from some ConCon advocates this basic argument: “We’ve lost. We’ve tried to win politically. It hasn’t worked. This is the only way we have left.”
That defeatist approach dooms us to perennial minority status.
First, it’s not true. We haven’t really organized the way we are capable of, the way the left has. And there are more conservatives than liberals in this country.
Second, this defeatist thinking is unfortunately infectious. It will discourage conservative activists from PRECISELY the political engagement and organizing we CAN and MUST to do to win, at precisely the time we are starting to win politically as we head into 2016.
Can you imagine what we could accomplish with a President Paul or President Cruz, and a wave of new change-agents in the House and Senate in 2016 ? This is what it will take to roll-back 8 years of Obama.
I realize many of us are discouraged. But the political winds are now on our side if we we work to raise our sails. And our side is learning to organize more effectively than ever.
Last year, Virginia’s 7th Congressional District was a cauldron of revolutionary political change with national implications. First, GOP House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s District Chairman, Linwood Cobb, was upset by little-known Tea Party activist Fred Gruber at the May 10th Convention in a shocking upset. And just 30 days later, building on that momentum, Tea Party favorite Dave Brat toppled Cantor himself in the primary in an even more shocking upset.
I know a little about this, having recruited Gruber, and run his all-volunteer grassroots campaign. I enjoyed putting together a team of grassroots leaders and activists and helping Brat’s historic campaign.
We united and mobilized our entire conservative base – traditional social and fiscal conservative Republicans, new Tea Party-inspired activists, and the liberty movement. I’ve seen the brush-fire this kind of united grass-roots engagement can bring, and the turnabout that is possible.
Dave Brat is now one of our key rising leaders in the fight to restore our Republic.
Yes, we need lots more Dave Brats and efforts like this. But this is the way we will save our Republic: conservatives organizing precinct-by-precinct, and seat-by-seat for state and local offices, the House of Representatives, U.S. Senate seats, and the Presidency. Ultimately, control of the Senate and White House for a prolonged period means establishing a constitutionalist Federal Judiciary. 2016 is our year to do it.
Perhaps the biggest concern with a Con-Con is the division and distraction within our Conservative movement at this critical time when political momentum is on our side. We struggle frequently to get our conservative activists smartly focused on the big-impact things, like organizing to win nominations and elections. Some are easily distracted by policy debates and things that have no practical impact on winning. I see the potential for conservative activists unwittingly being sucked into this ConCon if it passes, losing a Soros-funded nationwide PR battle, while the left’s activists stay focused organizing locally and winning elections.
And just look at the heated debate and division within our conservative ranks in Virginia right now. The rhetoric has reached fever pitch, with some ConCon advocates calling opponents “liars” and threatening primary challenges. Not good.
If I’ve learned anything over the years organizing our conservative ranks: if we are deeply split, it’s probably a bad idea. It’s counter-productive, and the establishment class and left lick their chops.
I hope you’ll join me in calling your Delegate and State Senator to demand they vote NO on this bad idea, however well intentioned.
37 comments
A Convention of States is NOT the same thing as a Constitutional Convention.. They needs to be made clear here and it is not.
Yes, it is. Black’s Law Dictionary says so.
I am certainly no lawyer but my understanding is that there are fundamental differences between a Constitutional Convention and and Article V convention. A Constitutional Convention precept is considerably different than a Convention of State. Although I guess you are correct in one way, a Convention of States can be considered as a form of a Constitutional Convention, but there are different rules and guidelines for an Article V convention. Since I am not a Harvard lawyer, you may want to go directly to the Convention of States organizations in your state and get more of your concerns address directly. You can find them at the ConventionOfState.com website.
Where’s
the money? If that is true, why isn’t George Soros pushing this on his
sites? This is an effort by THE PEOPLE to take our Government back.
Research this for yourself. We have a lot of hard facts to back us up. Fear tactics are being used and
false statements are being made to scare people away from the Article V
approach. It is in their best self interest for a convention NOT to
happen.
We at Term Limits for US Congress
are proposing one Amendment, and one Amendment only. That is to limit
the length of time one can serve in Congress to 12 years. Congress was
never meant to be a life long career. The term of our President is
limited. The term of our Governor is limited. Why not the US Congress?
They will never limit themselves, and that is why we must for the
first time in history take the avenue of the second option of Article V.
An
Article V convention would upset “business as usual” in Washington, and
once again empower the People and States. That is why those in power
do not want to see this happen.
At Term Limits for US Congress Virginia,
we are all ordinary citizens who are volunteering our time and efforts.
We have an active group here in Virginia and encourage you to check us
out and join us in our efforts.
Dale Fulk
Term Limits for US Congress
Virginia State Lead
Which Republican had the brilliant idea to introduce a bill that would tear the conservatives apart at their base in an important election year? Why didn’t Bill Howell or Tommy Norment show some leadership and have this put off until next year? What a bunch of buffoons. The Democrats are enjoying this. Thanks Mike Farris and Mark Levin for ripping our party apart at election time. Your skill at getting Democrats elected in a Republican-leaning year is remarkable.
Are you effin’ kidding? Tell me that you didn’t just post this fecal pablum? This is the equivalent of a John Birch Society skid mark in one’s underwear. This country is in dire condition. I hear her death rattle every day in the news. You sir, are clearly part of the problem and belong at the business end of a bayonet as a traitor to liberty.
Tech question for the authors of this blog: When this URL was posted to social media like FB, a nice graphic came up with the circle and red line over the subject. I don’t see it here, so how was this accomplished?
I think some Article V convention supporters relish the thought of seeing it all burn, and are content with that possible outcome by calling such a convention. When the good arguments are presented, spanning 200 years of warnings against such conventions because of how dangerous the process can be, and yet they say that it’s better than where we are, that means they’re content with seeing it burn if it doesn’t turn out rosy like they say they optimistically hope for. Pipe dream aspirations that might engulf the world in flames or hard, diligent work – eh, they’d rather take a hit off the pipe?!
They can’t stand the slow burn happening now that has a chance to be brought under control with the hard work of educating the electorate and the doubly hard political work of responsible legislating, re-legislating, and de-legislating. They’d rather douse the fire with gasoline, claiming that they’re just trying to help put it out. An Article V convention is gasoline on the fire, and some relish the inferno it’d create, and don’t care about the ensuing carnage.
It’s NOT better than where we are. It’s NOT better than the educational and political improvements being made and implemented for the future, changes implemented by the people and by their newly scrutinized elected representatives. This organic grass roots WORK is better than conventions of unknown, unelected delegates, unanswerable to the people, under incredibly powerful influences, given a saw, a hammer, and a hand grenade and told to go to work on our Constitution behind closed doors.
Prohibition, income tax, and the states losing their votes in Congress have all been bad amendments ratified. With the haters of the Constitution in our midst now, much worse could be proposed and ratified by unelected delegates.
From the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/some-va-republicans-want-to-amend-us-constitution-but-a-party-splits-in-the-way/2015/02/03/06a28c86-abcb-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html?hpid=z2
“Democrats, meanwhile, are opposed to the convention but not above dreaming about bending the Constitution their way.
“I’m against it, but if we have one, I want to be a delegate,” said Del. Mark D. Sickles (D-Fairfax). “There’s a lot of problems with this Constitution. I’ll just get up to this convention and start whacking away.””
When, and if, the Va. House and Senate do vote on SJ269, HJ497&499 we will then see which political party it is that really wants to trash the U.S. Constitution.
Yes, we do have a political problem. A political problem caused by not having ethics reform in our personal lives.
I have warned of the dangers of hate radio/media for many years. Now, maybe someone else will also see the danger when a few greedy “talking heads” corral millions of people in the name of false righteousness. A righteousness where success is measured in terms of how many millions or billions one has.
Russ, your and many other standup GOP leaders’ opposition to this bad idea that resurfaces every two decase like clockwork could save republicans from committing suicide. God Bless You. THANK YOU
2 decades?
Lingamfelter proposed this last year too, pffft.
I keep asking this question, and the answer keeps being the sound of crickets:
Levin and Farris keep claiming that their plan will “restore federalism”. How can that happen when almost every state’s budget is over 30% “Federal money” and their plan doesn’t even acknowledge that fact, much less address it?
All that money comes with an awful lot of strings that many State Legislators would be glad to get rid of. The above article misses the entire point of an article V convention. It isn’t to push a Conservative agenda into the Constitution, but rather to put the States back in charge of Washington D.C. As a Republic, the fifty states have an obligation to join together against an out of control federal government. Also, this whole hysteria over splitting the party before 2016 is insane. The Republicans could well be forced to vote for Jeb Bush, which would be far worse than a mere debate over how best to save the country. The Republican Party has been a big government party for over a hundred years. Asking us to trust that the national party can be reformed is asking a little much. After 8 years of Reagan the GOP went right back to normal, back to their big government, corporatist roots. Is there hope for another Reagan or Coolidge? Sure, but that’s 4 years or 8, and historically it never lasts. Fifty States versus 1 federal government and a convention to hold the federal government accountable. This is what the CoS’s movement is about.
The Constitution provides myriad ways to hold the Federal government accountable. CoS keeps repeating the mantra that one part of Article V is the ONLY means to do so, while completely ignoring the limitations in Article 1, Section 8 (which were the original “balanced budget amendment”), and the enforcement mechanisms built into Article 3 (good behavior and jurisdiction, meant to be enforced by Congress), Article 6 (the “supremacy clause”, which is only binding on laws made pursuant to the Constitution), and amendments 9 & 10. The latter of which are to be enforced by the states, not through Article 5, but through the very specific guidelines set forth by Madison in Federalists 44-46. – (Covered in depth here: http://coolidgeproject.us/madison-mediates-between-mark-levin-and-nullification-kooks/ )
But Farris and Levin have people believing that a fragment of Article 5 is the ONLY hope, and our last resort short of armed revolt. Such a rhetorical strategy is almost as dangerous as the convention itself, because it leads to statements like this one from an RTD article on Jan. 27th – “If it doesn’t work, there is only one other recourse — and that’s revolution,” (Pat) O’Brian (from Sterling) said.”
Do Farris and Levin even realize what kind of fire they are playing with, by ignoring all of the methods to check Federal overreach left to us, and advocated loudly and often, by the Framers? Or do they not care?
You are 100% right regarding all the various checks and balances, but the federal government no longer checks itself. Hence the need for the Fifty States to come together to check all 3 branches of the federal government.
Exactly my point. And Madison told them exactly how to do that in the ONLY Federalist Papers (44-46) dealing with Fed overreach and how to stop it. No variant of the word “amend” can be found in any of them.
The language for action by the States is in Article V, hence the name.
Move to strike as non-responsive.
Spot on, Russ.
Texas just signed on, that makes 20 states.
Yes, let’s not change the Constitution…no precedent for that. Let’s just keep the status quo, everything in Washington is great. The Framers put that article in there for a reason, and it is time to use it.
Your strawman is flaccid, and Article V has been used many times. That’s why we have 27 amendments, at least 4 of them bad, and all ratified overwhelmingly by the very states your plan requires you to trust, now that the electorate is even more ignorant and misinformed. What could possibly go wrong?
Well the first 10 were proposed by the states. The rest….well, that should pretty much answer the question to which half of Article V we should be using.. What could possibly go wrong, is already going wrong. Do have a plan to stop it? Didn’t think so.
As a matter of fact, I do. But, you obviously don’t care if I do or not, since you answered your own question without even pausing to take a breath.
“No bad amendments can pass, because WE control 28 state legislatures… Elections don’t work!” That’s the CoS argument, in a nutshell. How much more schizophrenic can you get?
These people are dangerously wrong AND logically inept. That should be enough for all of us to oppose this Article V convention idea.
Funny – I would descibe much of the Republican leadership in the same way. That’s why I know they will not save our country. You see they – like the democratic leadership don’t think they will ever have to pay for the mess they’ve made.
Your response is invalid, having not addressed my comment.
It’s obvious that I believe the educate and elect process is not going to work in time to avoid calamity. In addition, our senators and congressman are easily controlled by big money interests and the takers. Further, they are so firmly ensconced in the DC culture of power and money that they lose touch with the real world and its associated risks. That’s why they don’t feel the same sense of urgency that many of us do. I feel differently about state legislators. Yes they have political masters but are also closer to the people. In most states they are actually part time and associate more freely with regular folks. Congressman and senators are not the same – that’s why I think we have a better chance (our only chance) at the state level.
An added bonus – a COS would garner huge publicity and itself educate the masses about the true nature of our governmental structure as designed by the founders. In short – it would be a national history lessen that succeed or fail – could also help educate and elect true conservatives.
Happy Wednesday!
I generally like Sen. Black but I believe Ken Cuccinelli has more savvy on this issue than those who oppose it. Mark Levin is a very savvy Constitutional lawyer and both Ken and Mark are for it. I trust both of them. No one can accurately predict the future with 100% certainty but the Convention of States seems to me to be less risky than relying on the “leadership” of Boehner and company who have NOT measured up in the past.
That’s what the CoS folks keep telling you our position is “just elect better people”. Why don’t you just ask what our answer really is? We’ll tell you. They won’t, because they know ours is the right answer to the real problem.
I like Ken Cuccinelli, but I can recall a recent issue where Ken was on the opposite side of Dick Black and Bob Marshall on a State Constitutional issue. In 2007, Ken voted for the transportation bill which created unelected taxing bodies in Northern VA and the VA beach area. Ken did not vote for the final version of the bill after it was changed in conference, but when then Attorney General Bob McDonnell gave an opinion that the law was constitutional, Ken didn’t question him. Dick Black and Bob Marshall, along with Loudoun County, challenged the law and won a unanimous ruling by the VA Supreme Court declaring the law unconstitutional.
Ken (and Mark Levin) are not infallible, and there are numerous claims the CoS people have put forward that are directly refuted by the facts and case law. Our Constitution is too important to put at risk.
In regard to full disclosure I was never a Ken Cuccinelli fan but he is clearly and totally all in committed to this Article V boondoggle and I’d be happy to forward the endless spam in my email inbox if you need any confirmation to that statement. When the smoke clears from this vote I think its time for Virginia conservatives to undertake a serious, dispassionate evaluation of where its leadership lies and who we need to look to for sound advice and political direction. I for one don’t believe its Ken Cuccinelli.
“where it’s leadership lies”
Lawerence, check out the link below to find the answer to your question. These odd year sessions are nothing but trouble for middle-class and poor Virginia. And you think that this bill SB1349 was not purchased as if it were a candy bar in a vending machine?
Is it me, or, does The Republican Party have but one goal? The destruction of the middle-class, using reverse Robin Hood tactics?
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=151&typ=bil&val=SB1349
Well. put the false claims on the table so that they can be discussed. Our constitution is already at risk and has been for quite some time. What’s your plan?
Why don’t you go back and read all of the three or four other stories on this subject on the Bull Elephant, then get back to me if you have any questions.
http://thebullelephant.com/general-assembly-poised-to-vote-on-the-con-con/
http://thebullelephant.com/counterpoint-setting-the-record-straight-on-the-convention-of-states/
http://thebullelephant.com/howie-lind-opines-on-the-constitutional-convention/
http://thebullelephant.com/senator-dick-black-rebuts-mike-farris-on-the-convention-of-the-states/
Right on!