FrankRep
05-19-2011, 08:59 PM
http://www.kochsoft.com/tna/concon.jpg (http://www.jbs.org/STOPaCon-Con)
Choose Freedom - Stop A Con-Con on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/ChooseFreedom.STOPaConCon).
Stop Minnesota's Con-Con Calls (http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us)
On April 26, 2011, with an initial total of 20 sponsors, bill HF 1566 was introduced and first read in the Minnesota House of Representatives. Referred to and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, HF 1566 is a joint resolution that memorializes the Congress of the United States to “call a constitutional convention to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States to require a balanced federal budget.”
In addition to HF 1566, another bill, HF 1563, was also introduced and first read to the Minnesota House of Representatives on April 26. Referred to and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, HF 1563 is a joint resolution that memorializes “the Congress of the United States to call an amendment convention pursuant to Article V of the United States Constitution to propose a constitutional amendment permitting repeal of any federal law or regulation by vote of two-thirds of the state legislatures.”
However noble these proposed amendments to the U.S. Constitution may be in their attempts to restore sound fiscal restraint to Washington, the calling of a general Article V constitutional convention (Con-Con) is not the proper route that should be taken to make or propose such amendments to the Constitution. The safe way to amend the Constitution is for Congress itself to propose the amendments by a two-thirds vote in both House and Senate. This is how all 27 existing amendments have been added so far.
Back in the 1970s and 80s thirty-two states passed resolutions calling on Congress to convene a Con-Con for the purpose of considering the addition of a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) to the U.S. Constitution. According to Article V of the Constitution, when two-thirds (34) of the states issue requests for a Con-Con, Congress "shall call a convention for proposing amendments." The BBA proponents are still only two states short of the necessary 34 for calling a convention for the purpose of proposing a BBA. However, in the meantime 15 state legislatures have decided that a Con-Con would be so dangerous that they have voted to rescind all of their existing Con-Con calls. If these rescissions are considered valid, and they should be, then there are only about 17 states with live calls for a BBA Con-Con. This is far short of the necessary 34 states. See the article, "States Should Enforce, Not Revise, the Constitution! (http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/freedom-campaign-downloads/140-states-should-enforce-not-revise-the-constitution/download)" for more information.
The last time that such a convention was convened was in Philadelphia in 1787 when General George Washington, James Madison, and the various delegates from the thirteen United States assembled to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation -- the law of the land at the time.
Although called to strengthen and centralize the national government, the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 was convened to amend the Articles of Confederation rather than replace them. We were lucky then, seeing as the convention resulted in such an excellent Constitution. We were also fortunate to have had enlightened statesmen and drafters, such as James Madison, who understood the Lockean virtues and principles of individual liberty and limited government. Looking back, who among us today comes close to exemplifying the virtues of our Founding Fathers?
The answer is too few and far between, if any at all. The proposal for a second Con-Con promoted by so-called conservatives, would likely result in a runaway convention in which extremist or revolutionary elements could highjack the convention and alter the Constitution to include harmful amendments, such as “second generation” or “positive” socialist rights while curtailing our nation’s traditional negative rights that protect our liberties from the government.
What we need is not for the States to revise the Constitution, but rather to restore and enforce it as our Founding Fathers originally intended (for more information, click here (http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/freedom-campaign-downloads/140-states-should-enforce-not-revise-the-constitution/download) for a free PDF article download).
Although pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, we should not risk the passage of a Con-Con call no matter how appealing it may be. You now have the ability to help stop Minnesota from calling upon Congress to authorize such a convention. Contact your State Representative and State Senator now (http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us) and urge him or her to vote NAY and oppose the passage of HF 1566 and HF 1563 in the House and also the Senate, in the event that it passes the House.
Example Email:
Introduced on April 26, 2011 and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee of the Minnesota House of Representatives are bills HF 1566 and HF 1563. The purpose of HF 1566 is to propose an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require the federal government to balance the budget. The purpose of HF 1563 is to grant the states the legal authority and ability to repeal federal laws or regulations by a two-thirds vote of the state legislatures. Unfortunately, both HF 1566 and HF 1563 have one major flaw; they both call for Congress to convene a constitutional convention (Con-Con) to propose these amendments, pursuant to article V of the U.S. Constitution, rather than having Congress adopt the proposed amendments.
The key provisions of HF 1566 are:
"BE IT RESOLVED by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota that it applies to the Congress of the United States to call a constitutional convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States to achieve and maintain a balanced budget by:
(1) requiring that such balanced budget account for all obligations of the federal government;
(2) allowing flexibility in federal balanced budget requirements by providing exceptions related to exigencies such as national emergencies or threats to the nation's security;
(3) imposing spending limits on the federal government; and
(4) setting extraordinary vote requirements for new or increased federal taxes and other revenues."
The key provision of HF 1563 is:
"BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the State of Minnesota that they hereby apply and make application to the Congress of the United States to call an amendment convention pursuant to Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment that permits the repeal of any federal law or regulation by vote of two-thirds of the state legislatures, and the Minnesota delegation to such convention, when called, shall propose the following amendment: "Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed"..."
The case against calling such an amendments convention, also referred to as an Article V constitutional convention, in a nutshell is that a large number of constitutional scholars agree that an Article V constitutional convention cannot be restricted as to what amendments would be considered and ultimately proposed.
In the event of a constitutional convention, the purpose of which is to "propose amendments," the new amendment(s) would then be submitted to the states (either state legislatures or special state conventions as designated by Congress according to the Constitution, but possibly some other bodies proposed by the constitutional convention itself following the precedent of our original Constitutional Convention in specifying the means for the ratification of the Constitution) for ratification.
Although three-fourths of the states would have to ratify an amendment for it to become part of the Constitution, there is still the all-too-real risk that a harmful amendment or series of amendments could be ratified due to the extraordinary influence exerted on American voters and their representatives by powerful elites in our news media, government, educational institutions, and foundations.
Only a few state legislatures have called for a Con-Con in the past 30 years, and legislators in 15 states have become so thoroughly convinced of the dangers of a constitutional convention that they have voted to rescind (take back) all of their previous Con-Con calls.
You can find out more information about this issue at http://www.JBS.org/STOPaCon-Con
Please be sure to vote NAY on both HF 1566 and HF 1563.
Email Your State Reps!
http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us
Choose Freedom - Stop A Con-Con on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/ChooseFreedom.STOPaConCon).
Stop Minnesota's Con-Con Calls (http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us)
On April 26, 2011, with an initial total of 20 sponsors, bill HF 1566 was introduced and first read in the Minnesota House of Representatives. Referred to and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, HF 1566 is a joint resolution that memorializes the Congress of the United States to “call a constitutional convention to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States to require a balanced federal budget.”
In addition to HF 1566, another bill, HF 1563, was also introduced and first read to the Minnesota House of Representatives on April 26. Referred to and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, HF 1563 is a joint resolution that memorializes “the Congress of the United States to call an amendment convention pursuant to Article V of the United States Constitution to propose a constitutional amendment permitting repeal of any federal law or regulation by vote of two-thirds of the state legislatures.”
However noble these proposed amendments to the U.S. Constitution may be in their attempts to restore sound fiscal restraint to Washington, the calling of a general Article V constitutional convention (Con-Con) is not the proper route that should be taken to make or propose such amendments to the Constitution. The safe way to amend the Constitution is for Congress itself to propose the amendments by a two-thirds vote in both House and Senate. This is how all 27 existing amendments have been added so far.
Back in the 1970s and 80s thirty-two states passed resolutions calling on Congress to convene a Con-Con for the purpose of considering the addition of a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) to the U.S. Constitution. According to Article V of the Constitution, when two-thirds (34) of the states issue requests for a Con-Con, Congress "shall call a convention for proposing amendments." The BBA proponents are still only two states short of the necessary 34 for calling a convention for the purpose of proposing a BBA. However, in the meantime 15 state legislatures have decided that a Con-Con would be so dangerous that they have voted to rescind all of their existing Con-Con calls. If these rescissions are considered valid, and they should be, then there are only about 17 states with live calls for a BBA Con-Con. This is far short of the necessary 34 states. See the article, "States Should Enforce, Not Revise, the Constitution! (http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/freedom-campaign-downloads/140-states-should-enforce-not-revise-the-constitution/download)" for more information.
The last time that such a convention was convened was in Philadelphia in 1787 when General George Washington, James Madison, and the various delegates from the thirteen United States assembled to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation -- the law of the land at the time.
Although called to strengthen and centralize the national government, the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 was convened to amend the Articles of Confederation rather than replace them. We were lucky then, seeing as the convention resulted in such an excellent Constitution. We were also fortunate to have had enlightened statesmen and drafters, such as James Madison, who understood the Lockean virtues and principles of individual liberty and limited government. Looking back, who among us today comes close to exemplifying the virtues of our Founding Fathers?
The answer is too few and far between, if any at all. The proposal for a second Con-Con promoted by so-called conservatives, would likely result in a runaway convention in which extremist or revolutionary elements could highjack the convention and alter the Constitution to include harmful amendments, such as “second generation” or “positive” socialist rights while curtailing our nation’s traditional negative rights that protect our liberties from the government.
What we need is not for the States to revise the Constitution, but rather to restore and enforce it as our Founding Fathers originally intended (for more information, click here (http://www.jbs.org/action/downloads/freedom-campaign-downloads/140-states-should-enforce-not-revise-the-constitution/download) for a free PDF article download).
Although pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee, we should not risk the passage of a Con-Con call no matter how appealing it may be. You now have the ability to help stop Minnesota from calling upon Congress to authorize such a convention. Contact your State Representative and State Senator now (http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us) and urge him or her to vote NAY and oppose the passage of HF 1566 and HF 1563 in the House and also the Senate, in the event that it passes the House.
Example Email:
Introduced on April 26, 2011 and currently pending in the State Rules and Legislative Administration Committee of the Minnesota House of Representatives are bills HF 1566 and HF 1563. The purpose of HF 1566 is to propose an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require the federal government to balance the budget. The purpose of HF 1563 is to grant the states the legal authority and ability to repeal federal laws or regulations by a two-thirds vote of the state legislatures. Unfortunately, both HF 1566 and HF 1563 have one major flaw; they both call for Congress to convene a constitutional convention (Con-Con) to propose these amendments, pursuant to article V of the U.S. Constitution, rather than having Congress adopt the proposed amendments.
The key provisions of HF 1566 are:
"BE IT RESOLVED by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota that it applies to the Congress of the United States to call a constitutional convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States to achieve and maintain a balanced budget by:
(1) requiring that such balanced budget account for all obligations of the federal government;
(2) allowing flexibility in federal balanced budget requirements by providing exceptions related to exigencies such as national emergencies or threats to the nation's security;
(3) imposing spending limits on the federal government; and
(4) setting extraordinary vote requirements for new or increased federal taxes and other revenues."
The key provision of HF 1563 is:
"BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the State of Minnesota that they hereby apply and make application to the Congress of the United States to call an amendment convention pursuant to Article V of the United States Constitution for the limited purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment that permits the repeal of any federal law or regulation by vote of two-thirds of the state legislatures, and the Minnesota delegation to such convention, when called, shall propose the following amendment: "Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed"..."
The case against calling such an amendments convention, also referred to as an Article V constitutional convention, in a nutshell is that a large number of constitutional scholars agree that an Article V constitutional convention cannot be restricted as to what amendments would be considered and ultimately proposed.
In the event of a constitutional convention, the purpose of which is to "propose amendments," the new amendment(s) would then be submitted to the states (either state legislatures or special state conventions as designated by Congress according to the Constitution, but possibly some other bodies proposed by the constitutional convention itself following the precedent of our original Constitutional Convention in specifying the means for the ratification of the Constitution) for ratification.
Although three-fourths of the states would have to ratify an amendment for it to become part of the Constitution, there is still the all-too-real risk that a harmful amendment or series of amendments could be ratified due to the extraordinary influence exerted on American voters and their representatives by powerful elites in our news media, government, educational institutions, and foundations.
Only a few state legislatures have called for a Con-Con in the past 30 years, and legislators in 15 states have become so thoroughly convinced of the dangers of a constitutional convention that they have voted to rescind (take back) all of their previous Con-Con calls.
You can find out more information about this issue at http://www.JBS.org/STOPaCon-Con
Please be sure to vote NAY on both HF 1566 and HF 1563.
Email Your State Reps!
http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=24861&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us