Skip to comments.Corporate America Is Just 7 States Short of a Constitutional Convention
Posted on 03/14/2016 3:10:54 PM PDT by cotton1706
In February, Republican presidential hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) signed on to a call for a constitutional convention to help defeat the Washington cartel [that] has put special interest spending ahead of the American people.
Cruz, along with fellow Republican presidential aspirants Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Gov. John Kasich (Ohio), has endorsed an old conservative goal of a Constitutional amendment to mandate a balanced federal budget. The idea sounds fanciful, but free-market ideologues associated with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a secretive group of right-wing legislators and their corporate allies, are close to pulling off a coup that could devastate the economy, which is just emerging from a recession. Their scheme could leave Americans reeling for generations. A balanced budget amendment would prevent the federal government from following the Keynesian strategy of stimulating the economy during an economic depression by increasing the national debt. (Since 1970, the United States has had a balanced budget in only four years: 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001.)
Article V of the Constitution lays out two routes for changing the law of the land: An amendment can be proposed by Congress or by a constitutional convention that is convened by two-thirds of the states (34). Either way, three-fourths of the states (38) have to ratify it. Previously, changes to the countrys founding document have been achieved by the first process. But as of today, 27 statesseven shy of the twothirds threshold required by Article Vhave passed resolutions calling for a constitutional convention to consider a balanced budget amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at inthesetimes.com ...
With Trump as President, maybe Cruz, Rubio and Kasich could get some of these bills and laws straightened out.
For a more comprehensive Convention of the States dedicated to the Georgia application language extracted from Mark Levin's The Liberty Amendments, the count is still 6 down, 28 to go.
ME!!! Because it does not stop at the budget. I have read Mark Levin's liberty amendments and there are only a couple that actually liberate us from the beast. The majority will ultimately have the opposite affect of what they propose.
<>Maybe the alternative is the revolution Bernie Sanders is envisioning: Electing insurgent candidates to Congress, state and local office; strengthening and expanding direct democratic institutions like the ballot initiative process; making constitutional changes that elevate democratic decisions above corporate personhood; and building a movement that engages the thousands of communities where democratic governance has been all but quashed by ALEC-endorsed legal doctrine and legislation.<>
Rats love democracy. They abhor federalism.
Democracy works toward Bernie's goals; federalism is the means toward a good end, free government.
<> The majority will ultimately have the opposite affect of what they propose.<>
There are no limits to what such a group can change about the US Government. And you can be certain that "Progressives" will dominate the proceedings from the outset.
A large plurality, possible a majority of the US population wants Socialism. The appeal of "Free stuff for everybody" is very hard to overcome and mere facts will not matter. People want to believe. The Progressive organizers will use them to seize power at every opportunity.
Republicans control the House, the Senate, and most state legislatures.
They could pass an Amendment right now. But they won’t. Yet these are the same people we are to trust with an Art. V convention.
Don’t be played.
I am of the opinion that the best path to a balanced budget is to adopt a method of taxation based upon representation call representative apportionment.
Under this concept, the States are billed for the taxes. The tax bill would be split into two even portions. One is to then be divided by the number of representatives and the second portion is then divided by the number of senators. Each state would then be billed for the sum total of it’s Senators and Representatives.
I want a balanced budget, but I want term limits more. Very much more. And congress won’t go down that road, so we the people - MUST!
Keynesian Economics was proven to be a fraud decades ago.
Would you please post your Article V reference links?
flamberge is in need of an education.
There are two ways to propose an amendment to the Constitution.
Article V gives Congress and an Amendments Convention exactly the same power to propose amendments, no more and no less.
Once Congress, or an Amendments Convention, proposes amendments, Congress must decide whether the states will ratify by the:
The State Ratifying Convention Method has only been used twice: once to ratify the Constitution, and once to ratify the 21st Amendment repealing Prohibition.
Depending upon which ratification method is chosen by Congress, either the state legislatures vote up-or-down on the proposed amendment, or the voters elect a state ratifying convention to vote up-or-down. If three-quarters of the states vote to ratify, the amendment becomes part of the Constitution.
Article V contains two explicitly forbidden subjects and one implicitly forbidden subject.
There is no need to invoke Art. V, the same goals could be accomplished today.
A Convention of the States is NOT a Constitutional Convention!!!
They are two different things and you should educate yourself.
I’m 25, no college degree, and I know this. So should you.
“Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation’s frame of government, may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification. Amendments may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by eitheras determined by Congressthe legislatures of three-fourths of the states or State ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states.”
They could pass an Amendment right now. But they wont. Yet these are the same people we are to trust with an Art. V convention.
Dont be played.
I think the states will control who represents their interests at an Article V convention. The U.S. Congress should have no say.
That said, I have little faith in an Article V convention being able to solve our intractable problems. I would suggest that instead a model constitution be drafted by some stalwart and right thinking patriots (Mark Levin, Ted Cruz, +++), with the resulting document being then published widely. The publication should contain an invitation to the legislatures of the states to ratify, with the proviso that the ratification will have no effect unless and until it has been ratified by three-quarters of the states. At that time, the new United Sovereign States of America will be declared.
I know. That completely ignores the existing constitution's procedure for ratification. I would point out, however, that there is precedent in U.S. history for such a procedure. When our current constitution was drafted, the Constitutional Convenntion COMPLETELY IGNORED the Articles of Confederation's provisions for ratification of alterations of its provisions, as well as the convention's charging documents concerning the scope of its own authority.
> I would suggest that instead a model constitution be drafted by some stalwart and right thinking patriots (Mark Levin, Ted Cruz, +++)
I could not disagree more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.