You may be aware of Mark Levin’s book “The Liberty Amendments” released last year which called for a “Convention of the States”. Article 5 of the Constitution gives the several states the ability to convene a convention in which the Constitution may be amended, changed, or even scrapped.

Recently Michigan’s legislature voted and passed a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention. They are the 34th state to do so, and this should trigger the Convention of the States.  Pretty major, yet the MSM is ignoring it.
Read on.
From TRN News:

The most important political development in 200 years was triggered  last week, when the state legislature of Michigan became the 34 th state to demand a “Constitutional Convention” in the United States.   Under Article 5 of the US Constitution, if 2/3rds of the states call for such a convention, (meaning 34 states)  it MUST take place.  During such a convention, the ENTIRE Constitution can be  changed; nothing is off-limits.  This would even allow the States to  dismantle the federal government without its consent, and repudiate the  debt which that government has incurred!  When it voted for the convention last week, Michigan became the 34 th state, thus meeting the requirement.

A goal has been reached  behind what would be an unprecedented effort to amend the U.S.  Constitution, through a little-known provision that  gives states rather  than Congress the power to initiate changes. This  is the most significant political development in the entire world in the last 200 years.

At issue is what’s known as a “constitutional convention,” a scenario  tucked into Article V of the U.S. Constitution. At its core, Article V  provides two ways for amendments to be proposed. The first – which has  been used for all 27 amendment to date – requires two-thirds of both  the  House and Senate to approve a resolution, before sending it to the  states for ratification. The Founding Fathers, though, devised an   alternative way which says if two-thirds of state legislatures demand a  meeting, Congress “shall call a convention for proposing amendments.”

The idea has gained popularity among constitutional scholars in   recent years — but got a big boost last week when Michigan lawmakers   endorsed it.

Michigan matters, because by some counts it was the 34th state to do so. That makes two-thirds.

In the wake of the vote, California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter   pressed House Speaker John Boehner on today to determine whether the   states just crossed the threshold for this kind of convention. Like   Michigan lawmakers, Hunter’s interest in the matter stems from a desire  to push a balanced-budget amendment — something that could be done at a constitutional convention.

“Based on several reports and opinions, Michigan is the 34th state to issue such a call and therefore presents the   constitutionally-required number of states to begin the process of   achieving a balanced budget amendment,” Hunter wrote.

“With the recent decision by Michigan lawmakers, it is important that  the House – and those of us who support a balanced budget amendment —  determine whether the necessary number of states have acted and the   appropriate role of Congress should this be the case.”

If two-thirds of the states indeed have applied, the ball is presumably in Congress’ court to call the convention.

But Article V is rather vague, and it’s ultimately unclear whether 34  states have technically applied. In the past, states like Oregon, Utah  and Arizona have quietly voted to approve the provision in their   legislature.

But some of the 34 or so have rescinded their requests. Others have rescinded, and then re-applied.

Alabama rescinded its request in 1988 but in 2011, lawmakers again   applied for a convention related to an amendment requiring that the   federal budget be balanced. It was a similar story in Florida in 2010.

Louisiana rescinded in 1990 but lawmakers have tried several times, unsuccessfully, to reinstate the application since then.


It’s unclear whether the applications still count in these scenarios.

Some constitutional scholars like Gregory Watson, an analyst in Texas, say once states ask, there may be no take-backs.

“There is a disagreement among scholars as to whether a state that   has approved an application may later rescind that application,” Watson  told The Washington Times. “If it is ultimately adjudicated that a  state  may not rescind a prior application, then Ohio’s 2013 application for a  Balanced Budget Amendment convention would be the 33 rd and Michigan’s 2014 application would be the 34th on that topic.”

Others say if a state changes its mind, it can no longer be part of the 34.

Even if the requisite number of states have applied, questions remain  about how such a convention would work — and whether, as Michigan   wants, such a convention could be limited to only discussing a balanced-budget amendment.

It still may be a long shot, but some analysts are warning about the unintended consequences of such a move.

In Louisiana, Budget Project Policy Analyst Steve Spire argued against the state’s resolution, saying the convention could permanently  damage the nation’s political system.  What he calls “damage” others  call improvement.


Change from a federal form of national government, back to a  confederacy, which was what existed prior to adoption of the  Constitution in 1789.  No, not the one that existed during the Civil  War, the one that existed between the time we won the Revolutionary War  and the time we adopted the US Constitution.  What’s that you say, you  never knew the United States was a Confederacy before the Constitution?  So much for public school education.  In fact, the U.S. was a  Confederacy and under that form of government, there is NO NATIONAL  GOVERNMENT, just states that agree to do business with each other and to defend each other if attacked.  How’s that for simple?

If we make the mistake of keeping a federal government, we could  dramatically curtail its powers.  All elected officials could be  term-limited.  Judges could be term limited.  The jurisdiction of the  federal government could be for commerce only; no longer allowing it  criminal prosecution powers, leaving that to the states alone.

All Treaties currently in force, could be scrapped. We could cancel our participation in NATO no longer having to assure the safety of  Europe by shedding American blood to settle their squabbles.  (World War I,  World War II,  Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo etc.)  Make Europe  defend itself. We could scrap the Treaties with South Korea, Taiwan and  Japan, making them defend themselves rather than pledging American blood to keep them safe.  After all, for the fifty years or more that we have guaranteed the security of these countries, what have they done for  us?  Hint: Nothing.

We could scrap the Treaties with Russia concerning our nuclear  arsenal, allowing us to re-arm to face the new challenges posed by China becoming a super-power, India, Pakistan and Israel becoming nuclear  powers.

We could do away with the federal power to make war; delegating that  power to a simple majority of the fifty state legislatures voting in  concert.

We could do away with the Federal Reserve which creates money out of  thin air, causing inflation to erode our savings and earnings, and start printing our own real money, backed by gold, silver, platinum etc.  No  more central Bankers to parasite off our hard work the way they do now.

We could do away with the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register, both of which stifle American ingenuity  through reams of  government regulation.

We could put people ahead of animals and do away with rules that  forbid development of land because some little creature lives on it.

We could do away with the Department of Education, which during its  existence, has seen the education level of American children drop from  #1 in the world to somewhere toward the bottom.  This department is a  complete and total failure and it should be wiped out of existence.

We could do away with the Department of Energy, which was created  during the Carter Administration for the purpose of weening the United  States off imported oil.  Ask yourself this simple question: In the  forty years it has been in existence, has the Department of Energy even  come close to achieving what it was created to do?  No.  It is another  total failure and it should be wiped out of existence.

We could become energy self-sufficient within a year, by allowing our own natural resources to be developed-  then tell the Arabs to take  their oil and shove it.

We could stop the hand-outs to the permanent welfare class, forcing  them to get off their good-for-nothing lazy butts and get a job.

We could do away with the income tax!

We could restore the free market in EVERY industry; getting  government out of the way so that entrepreneurs can create new and  better products and services to improve all our lives.

This would be a new beginning for America; a new chance at vast prosperity, personal liberty and personal responsibility.

The last time there was a successful amendment was more than four decades ago – the 26th Amendment which changed the voting age to 18. States ratified the 27th Amendment on congressional pay increases, but it took more than 200  years to do it.  With the Michigan vote, this time we can right so many  wrongs, and finally get the government out of our lives.

TLB Highly recommends you visit Ploitical Ears for more great/pertinent articles and information.

See featured article here:

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.