{"id":1292,"date":"2009-12-25T10:55:05","date_gmt":"2009-12-25T15:55:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=1292"},"modified":"2015-11-19T05:55:12","modified_gmt":"2015-11-19T10:55:12","slug":"question-is-it-time-for-a-second-constitutional-convention","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=1292","title":{"rendered":"Question: Is it time for a second Constitutional Convention?"},"content":{"rendered":"

In my opinion, yes it is. We now have a completely irresponsible, incompetent and unrepresentative government.<\/p>\n

Personally, I think it is. We have reached the point where the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches of government have failed in their duties to uphold our laws, traditions and most importantly, our Constitution.<\/p>\n

Normally an amendment to the constitution is proposed in Congress. It goes through the usual business of hearings and votes and then is sent out to the states for their legislatures to vote on. Once this is done the amendment is either approved or rejected.<\/p>\n

In some cases there is a time limit inserted into the amendment with regards to its approval such as with the Equal Rights amendment. In other cases there is no time limit and it may take centuries for it to be approved. (See 27th Amendment<\/em>)<\/p>\n

However, if an amendment is deemed necessary and the Congress refuses to approve and submit it to the states for ratification, the founders of the United States also put in the mechanism for the states to call a Constitutional Convention.<\/p>\n

There is a down side to the States calling for a convention. There is no way to limit what is proposed and voted out. A number of people fear that the present Constitution would be discarded and a new one put in place. However, these people forget that any amendments, or even a replacement constitution would need to go to the states and follow the ratification process.<\/p>\n

There is the second problem of a total rewrite of the Constitution that people forget. The citizens of the untied States are inherently conservative. I don’t mean conservative in the political sense. I mean that we want change of this magnitude to be carefully considered. debated and discussed.<\/p>\n

If the power structure tried to jam a major and unwanted rewrite of the U.S. Constitution down the throats of the people, the odds of an actual lynching of said power structure would reach a high order of probability.<\/p>\n

While there is no doubt that some delegates would try to do just that, their attempts would probably fail. (Both on the far left and the far right) What would come out of a second convention would probably be a few amendments to update the constitution to reflect modern technology and the changes that have occurred in the last 200 years.<\/p>\n

We would see amendments instituting term limits on elected and appointed officials, (Congress and judges), possibly a rewrite of the 16th Amendment<\/a> changing how the income tax is handled or ending it all together and a few others to reflect how communications have changed in the last 200 years.<\/p>\n

Once the new amendments were approved and sent out to the states, 3\/4ths of the states would then have to approve the new amendments.<\/p>\n

Frankly, herding cats is a far easier thing to do.<\/p>\n

At the moment a majority of states have approved a call for a constitutional convention, although 3 have since rescinded that call. If it looks like the required states will approve a second Con-Con, and the changed would probably be approved, then Congress would probably move to short circuit the process by proposing the amendments themselves.<\/p>\n

Of course, asking Congress to limit their powers and the power of the Federal Government is almost laughable. Still, if they see the writing on the wall, they might just decided to “Do the right thing” as it were and pass the amendments the people are asking for.<\/p>\n

Below is the actual wording from the United States Constitution on how a Constitutional Convention would be called.<\/p>\n

U.S. Constitution – Article 5
\nArticle 5 – Amendment<\/p>\n

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I have also added a poll asking your opinion on whether or not the States should call for a convention. Please vote and also feel free to leave comments. Registration is open at all times, although I do have to approve your request.
\n(I don’t need a bunch of spammers hammering my site, thank you very much)\n<\/p>\n

\n\t
\n\t\t

<\/p>\n\t\t

<\/p>\n\t\t

Do you believe that the United States should have a constitutional Convention?<\/strong><\/p>