What do you think?
Rate this book
Amending the Constitution by Convention: A Complete View of the Founders' Plan
Americans are increasingly questioning - and resisting - the endless growth of the federal government. Part of this resistance finds voice in efforts to enforce state sovereignty through litigation and legislation such as the Health Care Freedom Act and the Firearms Freedom Act. Measures such as these protect existing, fundamental rights from erosion at the federal level. But the growing discontent has also reignited interest in an even more direct route for the people and the states to regain control over the federal government - the Article V constitutional amendment process.
Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, the states have the power to apply to Congress to hold a convention for the purpose of proposing constitutional amendments. This power was meant to provide a fail-safe mechanism to control the federal government.
This report demonstrates that the historical record during the Founding era establishes a clear roadmap to guide the Article V amendment process. Among other seminal discoveries, this report reveals that the Framers rejected drafts of Article V that contemplated the very kind of wide-open convention that could “run away,” substituting instead a provision for a limited-scope convention, attended by state-chosen delegates, and addressed to specific subject matters.
Of course, abuses of the Article V constitutional amendment process are possible. But that possibility must be viewed against the clear and present danger to individual rights and freedom of doing nothing. This report recommends that states seriously consider initiating the Article V constitutional amendment process to restrain the federal government.
Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, the states have the power to apply to Congress to hold a convention for the purpose of proposing constitutional amendments. This power was meant to provide a fail-safe mechanism to control the federal government.
This report demonstrates that the historical record during the Founding era establishes a clear roadmap to guide the Article V amendment process. Among other seminal discoveries, this report reveals that the Framers rejected drafts of Article V that contemplated the very kind of wide-open convention that could “run away,” substituting instead a provision for a limited-scope convention, attended by state-chosen delegates, and addressed to specific subject matters.
Of course, abuses of the Article V constitutional amendment process are possible. But that possibility must be viewed against the clear and present danger to individual rights and freedom of doing nothing. This report recommends that states seriously consider initiating the Article V constitutional amendment process to restrain the federal government.
Nook
First published September 16, 2010
3 people are currently reading
3 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
February 19, 2024
I think the issue was well-presented, even though from a biased point of view.
The issue of a “convention of states” was, on the whole, well-presented, but it makes some presumptions that clearly come from a hyper-conservative point of view. The implication is that the Left is destroying the county and that the federal government is out of control. The only solution is a constitutional convention of states under Article V, and that the risks of doing so are overblown. Setting aside the right-wing point of view, the article is well-done, well-presented, and well-researched.
The issue of a “convention of states” was, on the whole, well-presented, but it makes some presumptions that clearly come from a hyper-conservative point of view. The implication is that the Left is destroying the county and that the federal government is out of control. The only solution is a constitutional convention of states under Article V, and that the risks of doing so are overblown. Setting aside the right-wing point of view, the article is well-done, well-presented, and well-researched.
Displaying 1 of 1 review