johnwk
08-07-2014, 06:34 AM
Mark Levin was on the air this evening [Wednesday, August 6th] once again calling for a convention of the States under Article V to propose amendments which would alter our Constitution. Indeed, as Mr. Levin points out, our Founding Fathers did in fact put this provision in our Constitution and expected it to be used when and if Congress should not send proposed amendments to the States for ratification thought necessary in promoting good government and our nation’s general welfare.
Unfortunately, Mark Levin has still not addressed the fact than our Founding Fathers never anticipated when providing the convention method to alter our Constitution that the various States would be acting in concert with the federal government in the overthrow of our constitutionally limited system of government!
Tell us Mark Levin, which of our state governments are not receiving revenue from our federal government for functions not authorized under our Constitution? Do you consider appropriations from our federal government for such things as highways, state created public school systems, Medicaid, public housing, etc., as constitutional appropriations? Did you know that an overwhelming portion of every State Government’s spending is from misappropriate federal revenue? And you think the State Legislatures would not love the opportunity to make constitutional that which is now unconstitutional?
Which State Government does not now trample upon its own state Constitution and in the process works to tighten the iron fist of government around the necks of its own citizens? Your panacea, Mark Levin, is a very, very dangerous idea and would only play into the hands of the very people who now exercise power at both the federal and state level.
I believe your motives may be well intentioned Mr. Levin, but one must consider the probable consequences should a second convention be called and were eloquently stated by James Madison:
“You wish to know my sentiments on the project of another general Convention as suggested by New York. I shall give them to you with great frankness …….3. If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider itself as having a greater latitude than the Congress appointed to administer and support as well as to amend the system; it would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides; it wd. probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric. Under all these circumstances it seems scarcely to be presumable that the deliberations of the body could be conducted in harmony, or terminate in the general good. Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first Convention which assembled under every propitious circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a Second, meeting in the present temper of America, and under all the disadvantages I have mentioned. ….I am Dr. Sir, Yours Js. Madison Jr” ___See Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume 25 March 1, 1788-December 31, 1789, James Madison to George Turberville
In addition Mr. Levin, should you not consider who would be chosen to attend the convention? Surely it would not be a preponderance of freedom loving Americans such as you!
During the 1984 New Hampshire Convention to alter its State Constitution, which was challenged in U.S. District Court, of the 400 delegates 64 were attorneys, eight were judges, four were state senators, and 113 were state representatives and there were two legislative lobbyists….the very people who are now causing our misery! Do you have confidence in these sorts of people who would most certainly find their way into the convention?
The suit went on to charge “there has been over 175 lawyers, judges, senators and representatives out of the total of 400 constitutional convention (delegates) elected, (who) are already holding a pubic office both in the legislature and judicial branches in violation of the separation of powers doctrine, and this count does not include wives and immediate family members who have been elected on their behalf.”
The bottom line is, calling a second convention is a gamble which I believe is a very bad idea, and particularly so when every State Government is financially dependent upon our federal government for its existence! Think wise my friend!
JWK
If the America People do not rise up and defend their existing Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people it was designed to control and regulate?
Unfortunately, Mark Levin has still not addressed the fact than our Founding Fathers never anticipated when providing the convention method to alter our Constitution that the various States would be acting in concert with the federal government in the overthrow of our constitutionally limited system of government!
Tell us Mark Levin, which of our state governments are not receiving revenue from our federal government for functions not authorized under our Constitution? Do you consider appropriations from our federal government for such things as highways, state created public school systems, Medicaid, public housing, etc., as constitutional appropriations? Did you know that an overwhelming portion of every State Government’s spending is from misappropriate federal revenue? And you think the State Legislatures would not love the opportunity to make constitutional that which is now unconstitutional?
Which State Government does not now trample upon its own state Constitution and in the process works to tighten the iron fist of government around the necks of its own citizens? Your panacea, Mark Levin, is a very, very dangerous idea and would only play into the hands of the very people who now exercise power at both the federal and state level.
I believe your motives may be well intentioned Mr. Levin, but one must consider the probable consequences should a second convention be called and were eloquently stated by James Madison:
“You wish to know my sentiments on the project of another general Convention as suggested by New York. I shall give them to you with great frankness …….3. If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider itself as having a greater latitude than the Congress appointed to administer and support as well as to amend the system; it would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides; it wd. probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric. Under all these circumstances it seems scarcely to be presumable that the deliberations of the body could be conducted in harmony, or terminate in the general good. Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first Convention which assembled under every propitious circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a Second, meeting in the present temper of America, and under all the disadvantages I have mentioned. ….I am Dr. Sir, Yours Js. Madison Jr” ___See Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume 25 March 1, 1788-December 31, 1789, James Madison to George Turberville
In addition Mr. Levin, should you not consider who would be chosen to attend the convention? Surely it would not be a preponderance of freedom loving Americans such as you!
During the 1984 New Hampshire Convention to alter its State Constitution, which was challenged in U.S. District Court, of the 400 delegates 64 were attorneys, eight were judges, four were state senators, and 113 were state representatives and there were two legislative lobbyists….the very people who are now causing our misery! Do you have confidence in these sorts of people who would most certainly find their way into the convention?
The suit went on to charge “there has been over 175 lawyers, judges, senators and representatives out of the total of 400 constitutional convention (delegates) elected, (who) are already holding a pubic office both in the legislature and judicial branches in violation of the separation of powers doctrine, and this count does not include wives and immediate family members who have been elected on their behalf.”
The bottom line is, calling a second convention is a gamble which I believe is a very bad idea, and particularly so when every State Government is financially dependent upon our federal government for its existence! Think wise my friend!
JWK
If the America People do not rise up and defend their existing Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people it was designed to control and regulate?