Why I Support The Convention of States

For a video discussing the information contained herein, please click the link below.

https://youtu.be/etnPfobrVcQ

I don't know if you see this or not but the United States of America is in some deep trouble. While we have a spending deficit of at least 20 trillion dollars ($20,000,000,000,000), our Congress seems hell bent on NOT obeying the will of the people. Even a relatively simple partial Obamacare appeal has failed to materialize. If that isn't bad enough, the number of career politicians in Congress increases with each election cycle and when one is actually voted out or retires, it is a shock. The Founding Fathers knew that our Constitution wasn't perfect but they did their best to protect the document and allow it to grow with time.

The USA recently celebrated its 241st Birthday but not all is goodness and cheer. Washington D.C. is rife with politics and permanent gridlock as the Democrats and Republicans blame each other for every failure of legislation. I remember touching on this topic around 1992 or so but I have learned a lot more since that time. It is time that We, The People face some cold and hard facts.

We tried elections but all that we accomplished was the same gridlock but with different players. Career politicians only add to the problem with their entrenchment.

We tried the Supreme Court but all they did for us was to give ObamaCare legal legitimacy (Instead of saying it was unconstitutional).

Numerous bills are in Legislative Hell in both the U.S. Senate and the House but if Congress is a large part of the problem, why do we even consider them to be part of a solution?

Even essential and needed reforms bog down and die in the House and Senate and it usually takes a crisis for them to do anything. (And oftentimes what they do is as bad or worse than the problem/issue at hand. For Example, 9/11 was followed by The Patriot Act.... a POS unneeded piece of legislation because we had laws on the books to cover most every aspect of TPA.) The Congress is always eager to pass more laws but drags its feet when repeal time arrives. (This is especially true on taxation bills).

Even if some legislation is passed, it then has to meet muster with the K Street Lobbyist crowd. Good intentions get watered and bogged down until what is left is more a rights violation than protection of our rights.

The politics in Washington have gone beyond even toxic. Some of the best solutions out there for our problems are either apolitical or cut across political lines but the politicians refuse to even consider them.

The Swamp is not going to be drained from the inside. It becomes more and more apparent each day that the Congress is at least part of the swamp. What can be done regarding this dangerous and self-serving attitude?

Our Founding Fathers saw a potential future where the Federal Government might have to be reined in to do the will of the people. To guard against such a scenario, the FFs inserted a clause into the Constitution referred to as Article V:

"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."

If two thirds (of the US States call for a Convention of States, Congress will by law have to specify a date and place for the COS to occur. As can be seen, the threshold for such a Convention is high for very good reason. Our Constitution was the first of its kind for ruling a Nation State and our FF's wanted to both allow the Constitution to govern the electorate but also protect it from those who would befoul the rule of law.

Convention of States Protections regarding the Constitution.

The main reason for a high threshold regarding a COS is to protect the Constitution from the Electorate. (Election 2000 anyone?) A COS isn't something to be taken lightly because proposed Amendments from a COS bypass Congress and are put before the State Legislatures or by a Ratification Convention (Congress gets to choose) for approval. Other protections are as follows.

Even if an Amendment is approved, it has to be ratified by three-fourths of the US States to become law. (38 out of 50 States at this time)

The chance of a rogue amendment becoming law are next to nothing. It would first take 34 States to call a COS (All 34 would have to have the same purpose in mind), a limited amount of Commissioners from each state and then 38 out of 50 states to ratify an amendment to become law.

Each state gets only one vote during a COS regardless of population.

There is also no way that the Congress can coopt the COS because it clearly states that it will be the States sending the Commissioners and proposing amendments. Congress' only power is to set a date and time and place for a COS.

If Congress refuses to call a COS, it is in violation of the will of the people. The Supreme Court ruled some time ago that Congress would have to call for a Convention as long as the requirements for such an action are met.

Let's say that each state sends 3 Representatives to the COS. You would have a wide mix of political leanings amongst the 150 people. While places like HI, CA, OR, MA and IL would probably send more Liberal minded Commissioners, you can be assured that places like WY, AZ, UT and MT would not. There would have to be debate and possible compromise any way you look at it.

The original Constitutional Convention was not a 'Run Away Convention' as some would have people think. The Founding Fathers spent six YEARS debating what this new nation would have as governance. Believe it or not, there were more than a few that wanted the new nation to be slave free but at that time, MD, VA, NC, SC and GA held most of the power. (This wouldn't start changing until the 1820's). The FFs disavowed royal titles and creation of a gentrified peerage. John Locke and Thomas Paine also figured heavily in their thinking. The Bill of Rights was a new experiment in governance... hardly a 'run away' convention.

What would then happen if the COS came to be?

Possible Amendments to propose, (The link below is to a more concise version of this section. I also discuss some Laws that could be proposed on the basis of any passed Amendments.)

https://www.conventionofstates.com/which_amendments_could_a_convention_of_states_propose

TERM LIMITS for CONGRESS!

At the time of our country's formation, Term Limits weren't much of an issue because the example George Washington set and by the average life expectancy at the time. (60 was considered old.). In this modern day though, sixty is now barely into middle age and even at seventy mainstream life can largely be enjoyed. If there was one thing the FFs were wary of, it was the power of governance and how easily it could corrupt those using it. The citizens of the USA were politicians only secondly; they were farmers or lawyers first. Things began to change in the twentieth century though. FDR was elected to four terms as POTUS but term limits were imposed on the Executive Branch by Congress only a few years later. Strom Thurmond, Daniel Inouye, Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy would eventually hold on to their Senate seats until their deaths.

As of 2017, there are at least twenty-two members of Congress with thirty or more years of service; one has served a total of fifty-two years. This is not what our Founding Fathers intended to happen. Career politicians eventually become so entrenched that they are nearly impossible to remove. One Federal House Representative held his seat for fifty-nine years.... after his father held it for about thirty years before that.... and now his wife holds the same seat. How is this 'working for the people'? This entrenchment has resulted in a lot of problems with our governance. The current President spoke of tax reform and repealing Obamacare, but the Congress once more behaved like a Push Me-Pull You and initial attempts at passing legislation either failed or were sent into committee. The GOP said they would repeal Obamacare but when they had the majority... several GOP politicians voted against repeal. This should be enough proof that Congress has become the problem and with at least 22 of its members in for over 30 years (each!), you can also bet that is part of the problem. Ideally, one term as a Senator or three terms as a House Rep should be the new rule. This would take effect on the first election cycle after ratification (no grandfathering).

While on this topic, there is a matter of compensation and retirement pay for members of Congress. Their current pay is ca. 174,000 a year (base level Congressman/woman). Considering the recess times they receive, the health care they receive (NOT Obamacare) and the other perks of incumbency... why in hell are they paid so much? If their pay was set at 1975 levels (with grandfathering) ($44,600 per year), perhaps the days of the citizen serving his/her country would return. Retirement should also be based on that 1975 figure. If convicted of any wrongdoing, the guilty party should forfeit his/her seat and all retirement funds. Also, their health care should only be in force for the time they are in office.

Amendment XVI - Remove the IRS and rein in federal government taxation power.

This foul amendment came to be from a variety of factors. It arose from a Congress that was already showing signs of dysfunctionality, it was passed using a combination of class warfare and outright lies and it eventually gave rise to the dreaded IRS. The general language of the Amendment has left too many windows open for abuse.

While under standard rules, the government has to prove you are guilty of wrongdoing, if accused by the IRS you are required to prove you are right. That is a violation of the electorate's rights under the Constitution. For example, the IRS could seize or freeze some or all of our assets. You then will have to hire a tax attorney and hope that you can convince the court to make the IRS give back at least some of what it stole. The Congress has been able to wield the IRS like a Hammer of Absolution and this war on the electorate must come to an end. Hopefully, an Amendment to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment will bring a sea change in Congress... perhaps enough for a revitalized Congress to pass true Tax Reform.

A supermajority of both the House and Senate will be required to raise Federal Taxes

If something like a Consumption Tax comes to be instead of our current system, this will help to reduce tampering with the Consumption Tax Rate.

Redefine General Welfare Clause - Prohibit entitlement spending and Federal Mandates to the 50 States.

The GWC originally was included in the Constitution so that the Federal Government could provide for the general welfare of the nation. What has it got for us today? This clause has been interpreted as allowing the Congress to tax and spend on anything it chooses. This has resulted in entitlement program expansion (Monies received simply for being of a certain Homo Sapiens strain or passing a test of being somehow in need), the usage of Earmarks to gain votes and an endless stream of Federal Mandates tied to monies given to the 50 states by the Federal Government. In order to control some of the aforementioned and stop the rest of it, this part of the Constitution needs to be delimited so that spending is actually for the General Welfare. The Federal mandates also need to end (Refer to the Laws Section of this document under 'Tenth Amendment Litmus Test'.).

While on this proposed amendment topic, Social Security should be mentioned. SS is not an entitlement; people paid into the system via FICA deductions from their pay. It was Lyndon Johnson who decided that SSI pay-ins were revenue and could be spent as they were received. It was also Democrats who decided that SSI income should be taxable. This happened almost 50 years ago and it is time for it to end. The Congress has no right to spend that money and since when should people have to pay taxes on what was deducted as a tax in the first place. It is time to take away SSI pay-ins from Congress and to exempt SSI income from taxation.

Redefine Interstate Commerce Clause - End a lot of government regulation that is unlawful.

This is another clause that has been usurped by the Federal government via interpretation. The original purpose of this law was to regulate matters interstate between the states. (An example would be uniform currency across the states and the prohibition of states placing tariffs on other states' goods.). Unfortunately, this clause has been interpreted to mean that the Federal Government can interfere in all business activity. One example would be someone in Oregon creating a lake on his property so he could stock it with fish. His plan was to have fresh fish for eating whenever he wanted but the Federal Government attempted to take over management of the new lake in order to protect the fish in it. Since when is the Federal Government allowed to harass its citizens for actually doing something beneficial for the environment? This clause also needs to be delimited so that the Federal Government only takes action when there is a clear need to regulate a matter that is between states.

Redefine Treaties - Nation to nation not to US Internal Laws

Treaties are made between the USA and other foreign entities, NOT between the Federal Government and its citizens.

Immigration Reform

This is an example of a solution that is fully viable but would never be implemented because of a logjam in Congress. A proposed Amendment should deal with Open/Controlled Immigration without Quotas, the implementation of Ellis Island style Immigration Processing Centers and protection of the generated revenues from Congress.

Banning Lobbyists from Influencing Congress

It is bad enough when Congress members make a career out of politics but many of them upon 'retirement' gain employment with Lobbying Firms who are heavily influencing members of Congress. They, in essence, are 'milking the other end of the cow' and this only erodes the will of 'We, The people'. While many of the most corrupt and brazen examples are (at times) outed, the influence peddling still goes on... and on. Anyone remember the Enron fiasco? While Phil Gramm ran interference for the company, his wife Wendy was first on the Enron Advisory Board and later worked for Enron proper. The only way to win this game is to cut off the lobbyists from the Congress or impose a least a ten-year ban on former Congress members becoming lobbyists. An outright ban would be the better choice and regarding freedom of speech, lobbyists deny that right to the electorate with their influence peddling.

Possible Laws to be proposed by Congress or by The People.

(The Commissioners at the COS are not a Law Making body. They will only be in place to propose amendments to the Constitution. Once the proposed amendments are ratified and then made into law, then perhaps some legal matters could be resolved.)

Tenth Amendment Litmus test

The Constitution is very clear defining the powers of the Federal Government.

Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for the common defense and the general welfare; to regulate commerce, bankruptcies, and coin money.

To regulate internal affairs, it has the power to regulate and govern military forces and militias, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.

It is to provide for naturalization, standards of weights and measures, post offices and roads, and patents; to directly govern the federal district and cessions of land by the states for forts and arsenals.

Internationally, Congress has the power to define and punish piracies and offenses against the Law of Nations, to declare war and make rules of war.

The final Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Elastic Clause, expressly confers incidental powers upon Congress without the Articles' requirement for express delegation for each and every power.

There also are limits against the Federal Government.

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. (At one time, this prohibited taxes on Capital Gains or Dividends. This was annulled by the passage of Amendment XVI.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

At the time of creation, the Federal Government was the only entity that could summon the manpower for building roads. Nowadays, road maintenance is done by the states and there is little to no need for building roads. This power needs to be taken from the Federal Government. In addition, the Elastic Clause should also be revoked. If that is done, then Federal Power can be given granularly (Only as needed).

The Tenth Amendment is also very clear on certain matters.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

In context, this means that items like Gay Marriage, Abortion and Education belong to the States for implementation. State governments are closer to the electorate than Washington D.C. so as powers belonging to the states are reaffirmed, the associated Federal agencies created from the overreach should be dissolved. If something like this were to happen, the combination of this law and an Amendment stating that Federal mandates are unconstitutional would be a powerful force in Education reform at least.

Audit the Federal Reserve and our gold.

Does anyone know the state of The Federal Reserve? Its purpose is to regulate monetary policy and to oversee the US Banking System... but what exactly is its status? While we are on the topic, what is the status of US Gold Reserves? For an agency that has this much control over the economy (controlling banks and interest rates), it functions with little real oversight. Perhaps it is time to audit both the FR and our gold supplies.

Audit the Military/Industrial Complex - Trash some unneeded programs.

The electorate is (usually) informed when military procurement results in a sale of ordnance to the military but tales of cost overruns and ridiculous procurement policies are even more prevalent. A Law is needed to call for auditing this procurement process and to see what money is being spent where (with a minimum of redaction). White Elephants that are found could have their funding removed and the savings from such actions could be more efficiently repurposed.

Taxation Reform

If the COS manages to nullify the Sixteenth Amendment and Term Limit the Legislative branch of government, perhaps this would allow for real Taxation Reform to occur. Such reform is a matter of law versus an amendment proposal.

Give back all federal land not allotted under the Constitution.

A variation of the Tenth Amendment Litmus Test, a law could be passed requiring the Federal Government to surrender all federal land not allotted to it under the Construction to be given back to the respectful states where the land is located. A possible exception could be made for the National Parks but those should also be under control of the States with the caveat that they be preserved. A super majority law for creating any further National lands would also be a wise piece of legislation.

Stop the printing of more Fiat Currency.

When the US Government runs out of money, it simply prints as much as it needs. This deflates the value of the currency already in circulation. An analogy to this is a fragile balloon (the money available) that is endlessly expanding (printing more money) whereas one accident (disruption in the faith in a government to pay its debts) will burst the balloon. Those holding the money (the balloon) would now be owners of worthless pieces of colored paper. Laws need to be passed to control the monetary printing presses.

Law Review

There are some rather inane laws still on the books in all 50 states and probably at the Federal Level as well. (This could possibly be because Congress likes creating laws more than abolishing them.) A Law review done on a regular basis would reduce unneeded regulation and create more freedom. For example, why have eight laws governing one action or thing when one well-written law can do the same thing? As a minarchist, I would be in favor of striking the eight laws and replacing them with the one better-worded law. Congratulations! You have just removed eight unneeded laws and replaced them with one. As this effort it repeated over time, we wind up with an easier to understand legal system and more freedom.

This may not even be a complete list of Proposed Amendments to be created from a COS or Laws that could be created from a revitalized Legislative arm, All thoughts, good or bad, are welcomed regarding this post. For more information regarding this topic, please visit:

https://www.conventionofstates.com/which_amendments_could_a_convention_of_states_propose

Timothy Linnomme