Donate
  • Freedom
  • Innovation
  • Growth

Why an Amending Convention of the States?

The Case for an Article V Convention (Part 2)

In our last PolicyByte we began to make the case for an Article V convention of states for the purpose of amending the Constitution to rein in the federal government and restore fiscal controls.
 
Many grassroots conservatives have opposed the idea of an Article V convention out of misplaced concern about a “runaway convention.” We’ll explain in the next PolicyByte why a runaway Article V convention is impossible. But many conservative thought leaders, including people respected by the grassroots like radio and TV host Mark Levin, support the idea. In his book, Levin even proposes 11 amendments intended to “restore our founding principles.”
 
The Founders expected and anticipated the need to amend the Constitution, and in Article V created two means for doing so. While both methods require the approval of three-quarters of the states (now 38), the first method originates with Congress and is run by Congress.
 
But the second method, which has never been used, is initiated and run by the states, with Congress having only the ceremonial role of calling the convention. The states themselves would determine the scope of the convention and its rules, but of course all within the text and limits of Article V.
 
The Founders wisely understood that there might come a time when the states had to take action in the face of an unresponsive federal government that, for whatever reason, needed to be acted upon. A convention of states is a way of doing an end-run around Congress, rather than leaving the states powerless, since powerless states were the last thing the Founders intended.
 
Remember, it was the states that created the federal government, and not the other way around. Had we adhered to the Ninth and Tenth Amendment reservations of power to the states, an amending convention would probably not be necessary, but thankfully the Founders supplied us with a means of remedy.
 
In other words, an Article V convention of the states is legitimate, was designed by the Founders, and was intended to be used. And those who think it’s a terrible idea, well, they disagree with the Founders and think the Constitution is flawed, at least in Article V.
 
Now, ask yourself this question: Have you seen any evidence that the federal government is capable of reforming itself? That it’s capable of reducing its power and returning power to the states? That it intends to get spending under control and set its fiscal house in order? Neither have I.
 
There’s never going to be a magic election where Republicans win enormous majorities in the House and Senate, win the White House, AND then are willing to voluntarily reduce their power. Not gonna happen.
 
If change is to happen, it will have to be the states that do it.