UTAH - Letter to Congressman Chaffetz about a "Balanced Budget Amendment" , Article V

[Tatsit]

Note: This letter is a good template -- Also it is very important that you understand what Article V of the constitution, and what a constitutional convention is all about before reading:
http://www.itsourfreedom.com/forum/index.php?a=topic&t=75



***************************

The link to this article on the forum is:
http://www.itsourfreedom.com/forum/index.php?a=topic&t=124

Please email this link and share with everyone you can - together we can all preserve our constitution, but it is going to take everyone!

***************************


Dear Congressman Chaffetz:

As a registered voter and a constituent of yours in Utah District #3, I thought you wouldn't mind a brief note from me on the topic of your proposed Constitutional Amendment attempt that would be initiated by you to seek to convince the U.S. Congress to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. These two articles have already introduced your idea to Utahans:

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705273910,00.html
http://www.sltrib.com/utahpolitics/ci_11331476?source=rss

Congressman Chaffetz, I wondered if you were aware that there is no need for a Balanced Budget Amendment, since Congress already has the power to balance the budget at any time simply by voting a majority vote to do so?

What's needed in America are citizens, an electorate, who understand that government should live within its income; voters who would force out of office spendthrift Congressmen who continue to spend more that revenue collections, year after year, leading us into over $11 Trillion of indebtedness.

What's needed are Congressmen who actually obey the Constitution and only pass legislation that is in compliance with the Constitution, that is that does not go beyond the few enumerated powers granted to Congress and Presidents. What's needed is an understanding among Americans and Congressmen that socialist programs (i.e. Medicare, Medicaid, social security's ponzi scheme), socialist bailouts, and unconstitutional wars, unconstitutional foreign aid, and governmental departments are milking America of her wealth and should not be voted for.

In 2001, the Utah Legislature, without a dissenting vote, passed HJR-15, a resolution to rescind all of Utah's applications to Congress to hold an Article V Convention, or what's often called a "Constitutional Convention," Con-con for short. Up until then, Utah's Legislature thought that a national, Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution, that is an Article V Convention, should be assembled in order to get the already rejected Balanced Budget Amendment passed. In other words, assemble a convention to run the risk that the Convention might propose dozens, or hundreds of amendments to our Constitution, even to the point of becoming a "runaway convention" and offering a completely different form of government to the states for ratification, in order to possibly pass one amendment, a Balanced Budget Amendment.

U.S. Senator Orrin G. Hatch had often told Utah Legislators that they should keep their call for a Con-con open essentially in order to pressure Congress into passing a Balanced Budget Amendment. So Senator Hatch was willing to risk a runaway Convention for possible passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment. Not, in this voter's opinion, a sound move, but instead a very dangerous move.

Be careful your proposal doesn't lead towards a call for an Article V Convention! Patriotic Utahans have already been through this fight before to preserve our Constitution from such a convention. The Founders intended the Article V Convention to be available as a "bloodless revolution" if needed to change forms of government. What's needed is a Congressional and presidential return to obedience to the strictures and provisions of the Constitution, not a redesign of that governing document.

Sincerely,

Bliss W. Tew, Constituent
btew@jbs.org

cc: JBS Leaders and friends in Utah County and Salt Lake County.

http://jbs.meetup.com/13/messages/boards/thread/6022800/#24061024

[Original_Intent]

That's cool, I know Bliss Tew and he is a great man. I wouldn't mind seeing him run for office. I met him thru the JBS.

[Bill Walker]

Before anyone makes up their mind about the material contained in this JBS letter, I suggest they consider that much of the material is either a lie or a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.

I'll just cite the most obvious: The direct and intentional omission by the letter writer of how many states have applied for an Article V Convention with the issue of a balanced budget amendment included in the application. And before going on, if you read the links given, you'll see the John Birch Society categorically states that if 34 states apply for an Article V Convention (regardless of amendment issue though as you'll soon read, this point is mute) Congress must call an Article V Convention.

The public record is clear. A total of 37 states have applied for an Article V Convention with the issue of a balanced budget amendment included in the application. However, this is not the full story. That same public record shows that all 50 states have submitted more than 650 applications for an Article V Convention. John Birch has admitted if Congress receives 34 applications, there must be a convention call. Why has John Birch lied and made everyone believe they must "stop" this?

Because John Birch wants you to help them overturn the Constitution by civil disobedience, that is, get it in your heads the Constitution can be vetoed by both you and the government. Why else would they tell you an outright lie about how many states have applied for an Article V Convention unless it was for their own political purposes? By their own words Congress has no choice in this: they must call and if you check the public record, you'll see the number of applications needed to compel a call occurred nearly 60 years before the John Birch Society existed meaning the states have repeated themselves in their desire for a convention 20 times over since then.

It's real simple. Either you believe in the Constitution or you don't. Either you work to have it obeyed by solving any problems obedience to it causes, or you work to overturn it. One is patriotic, the latter clearly is not. John Birch wants you to follow the latter path. It's up to you to decide if you will

You can read the public record, that is the actual texts of the more than 650 applications at www.foavc.org . Go to the site. Get educated. Spread the truth. Thank you.

[Original_Intent]

Dear Congressman Chaffetz:

As a registered voter and a constituent of yours in Utah District #3, I thought you wouldn't mind a brief note from me on the topic of your proposed Constitutional Amendment attempt that would be initiated by you to seek to convince the U.S. Congress to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. These two articles have already introduced your idea to Utahans:

http://deseretnews.co...
http://www.sltrib.com...

Congressman Chaffetz, I wondered if you were aware that there is no need for a Balanced Budget Amendment, since Congress already has the power to balance the budget at any time simply by voting a majority vote to do so?

What's needed in America are citizens, an electorate, who understand that government should live within its income; voters who would force out of office spendthrift Congressmen who continue to spend more that revenue collections, year after year, leading us into over $11 Trillion of indebtedness.

What's needed are Congressmen who actually obey the Constitution and only pass legislation that is in compliance with the Constitution, that is that does not go beyond the few enumerated powers granted to Congress and Presidents. What's needed is an understanding among Americans and Congressmen that socialist programs (i.e. Medicare, Medicaid, social security's ponzi scheme), socialist bailouts, and unconstitutional wars, unconstitutional foreign aid, and governmental departments are milking America of her wealth and should not be voted for. YEP this is someone telling people to disobey the Constitution all right.
In 2001, the Utah Legislature, without a dissenting vote, passed HJR-15, a resolution to rescind all of Utah's applications to Congress to hold an Article V Convention,Hmm how many other states have rescinded their applications for a con-con? or what's often called a "Constitutional Convention," Con-con for short. Up until then, Utah's Legislature thought that a national, Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution, that is an Article V Convention, should be assembled in order to get the already rejected Balanced Budget Amendment passed. In other words, assemble a convention to run the risk that the Convention might propose dozens, or hundreds of amendments to our Constitution, even to the point of becoming a "runaway convention" and offering a completely different form of government to the states for ratification, in order to possibly pass one amendment, a Balanced Budget Amendment.

U.S. Senator Orrin G. Hatch had often told Utah Legislators that they should keep their call for a Con-con open essentially in order to pressure Congress into passing a Balanced Budget Amendment. So Senator Hatch was willing to risk a runaway Convention for possible passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment. Not, in this voter's opinion, a sound move, but instead a very dangerous move.

Be careful your proposal doesn't lead towards a call for an Article V Convention! Patriotic Utahans have already been through this fight before to preserve our Constitution from such a convention. The Founders intended the Article V Convention to be available as a "bloodless revolution" if needed to change forms of government. What's needed is a Congressional and presidential return to obedience to the strictures and provisions of the Constitution, not a redesign of that governing document.

Sincerely,

Bliss W. Tew, Constituent
btew@jbs.org

Yep, that ol' JBS, trying to get people to disobey the Constitution. Them and that darn Constition Party are just a bunch of subversives!

[Tatsit]

Before anyone makes up their mind about the material contained in this JBS letter, I suggest they consider that much of the material is either a lie or a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.

I'll just cite the most obvious: The direct and intentional omission by the letter writer of how many states have applied for an Article V Convention with the issue of a balanced budget amendment included in the application. And before going on, if you read the links given, you'll see the John Birch Society categorically states that if 34 states apply for an Article V Convention (regardless of amendment issue though as you'll soon read, this point is mute) Congress must call an Article V Convention.

The public record is clear. A total of 37 states have applied for an Article V Convention with the issue of a balanced budget amendment included in the application. However, this is not the full story. That same public record shows that all 50 states have submitted more than 650 applications for an Article V Convention. John Birch has admitted if Congress receives 34 applications, there must be a convention call. Why has John Birch lied and made everyone believe they must "stop" this?

Because John Birch wants you to help them overturn the Constitution by civil disobedience, that is, get it in your heads the Constitution can be vetoed by both you and the government. Why else would they tell you an outright lie about how many states have applied for an Article V Convention unless it was for their own political purposes? By their own words Congress has no choice in this: they must call and if you check the public record, you'll see the number of applications needed to compel a call occurred nearly 60 years before the John Birch Society existed meaning the states have repeated themselves in their desire for a convention 20 times over since then.

It's real simple. Either you believe in the Constitution or you don't. Either you work to have it obeyed by solving any problems obedience to it causes, or you work to overturn it. One is patriotic, the latter clearly is not. John Birch wants you to follow the latter path. It's up to you to decide if you will

You can read the public record, that is the actual texts of the more than 650 applications at www.foavc.org . Go to the site. Get educated. Spread the truth. Thank you.


I am not sure if you read this letter backwards in a mirror or not, but there is at no point in that letter JBS was trying to get people to disobey the constitution and overturn it - he is stating that congress needs to obey the current constitution and NOT enter a con-con - because that would re-write our constitution.

Your website "Friends of the Article V Convention" is sending the wrong message, although it is apart of the constitution the results of a Con-Con can be a disaster for the constitution and our way of life.

Your website is wrong - I read on there that they believe this is the first time for a Con Con? That is incorrect, it has happened one other time and it was a run away convention although that time was good for us, it is how we ended up with the current constitution. However with the wrong powers in power the next one could be a disaster.

From the friends of the article V convention:


Are you aware that We The People are being denied our constitutional right to an Article V Convention to make amendments, despite 643 (or more) applications by the state legislatures of ALL 50 states?
We need your help. If you want to help reclaim our rights, then you have come to the right place.


Or rights are already listed in the constitution - why do we need to amend more? what we need to do is forget the con-con nonsense and force congress and the president to obey our current constitution and get back to a republic.

If you want to help reclaim our rights - article V is not the way to do it - We do it by joining in the grass roots movement and get people in to power that are constitutional and freedom minded, and wake the public up!

[Tatsit]

UPDATE: Jason Chaffetz replies

From: chaffetz@gmail.com on behalf of Jason Chaffetz
Sent: Mon 1/5/2009 4:58 PM
To: Bliss Tew
Subject: Re: Balanced Budget Amendment?

I understand your concern. Let the camel's nose under the tent and who knows what might happen. It is a valid concern.

Thank you,
Jason Chaffetz

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Bliss Tew <btew@jbs.org> wrote:
Congressman Chaffetz,

My larger concern is that once your bid for a balanced budget amendment is defeated by Congress, judging by their past total unwillingness to stay within their revenue and always overspending, then, some state governments may again be urged by certain groups to apply to Congress for an Article V Convention. That's the biggest danger that I was seeking to make you aware of, but that you didn't address in your reply to me. An Article V Convention can become a "runaway convention" that endangers the existing constitution.

Bliss

From: chaffetz@gmail.com on behalf of Jason Chaffetz
Sent: Sat 1/3/2009 7:52 AM
To: Bliss Tew
Subject: Re: Balanced Budget Amendment?

Thanks for the note. I agree it is within the power of the Congress to act responsibly, but they have proven they are unable to achieve it. It works for the people of Utah because it is in our state constitution.

Thanks for the note.

Jason Chaffetz

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Bliss Tew <btew@jbs.org> wrote: