As of now I do not support an Article V convention, as I believe that a constitutional convention is not the right way to stop the federal assault on our Constitution and the freedoms it protects.
Please use this discussion and post any and all links, posts and information both for and against an Article V Convention here without personal opinions except those backed by solid proof so the information shown will help inform rather than persuade.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Ok, I will take the bait. Who in fact runs the state? patriots? you? Me? Or is it powerful corrupt politicians who stay in power with leftist backing? How are we going to change the Federal Government when we cant change Cali? As for doing my own work well that's what I'm doing here. Asking for help from my fellow Patriots who know a hell of a lot more about this than I do. Just read the posts here, read all the information given to us by our Brothers. Now I ask you Lance, where do you get your information about how great this Article V Convention is? Who shared this idea with you? Please share it with me so I can read about the benefits it will give us if we do support it. How will this change the way we live here, In The once great state of California? How will it help us get rid of our corrupt leaders here and change California? Remember this, If we change California the rest of the country will follow.
Those were meetings of the Continental Congress, and later, meetings of of the United States government, under the Articles of Confederation. Under the Articles, there was a president, however, he was president of the Congress, not of the country.
Did I read that there was 27 separate C o s. and in the last one the came up with the Constitution as we should know it, with article V? I am talking about all of those meetings that happened after the war and before the constitution, weren't they Convention Of State?
The only conventions I am aware of were the respective state constitutional conventions. These, with one exception, came after the states had adopted constitutions, in accordance with the recommendation of the Continental Congress in May 1775, recommending each colony for a new government. Rhode Island and Connecticut made simple revisions to their charters (royal), omitting any reference to King, England, Parliament, etc.
The other colonies created constitutions that were done entries, with the one exception, by the state legislatures. In the ensuing years, it was realized that a subsequent legislature would "amend" the constitution, so that there were incessant changes to the Constitutions. Realizing the problem of the legislature being the source, they realized that the People had to be the source, so that regular changes could not be made as political expedients. So, constitutions were proposed and then delegates selected from the counties, or other jurisdictions, not from the legislature. They, then, ratified the constitution, making it more difficult to amend, as had been done, and making it the will of the people, not the will of the politicians.
By 1787, this concept had been adopted by all of the states, and was embodied in the ratification process for the Constitution (Article VII), though not for amendments to the Constitution (Article V). Unfortunately, too, is that most states have removed this concept of amendment, to be ratified by convention, and allowed the legislature to amend state constitutions and to ratify amendments to the federal Constitution.
These conventions, however, would be called "state conventions", both for the state constitution and the ratification of the federal constitution. They would not be referred to as "Conventions of the States". Of the latter, I am not aware of any, by that name.
This was a great discussion, lots of information to assimilate and work from. But because this is still rather controversial, SOLR cannot support a COS. You, however, as individuals can support anything you want, just as long as you are not representing SOLR while doing so. I am closing this discussion at this point, because I believe we have compiled enough information with it. Thanks for all your input.