Maybe We Should Try Using Our Constitution Before Changing It

 I have argued elsewhere that a Convention of States, COS for short, is both dangerous and ineffective.  My reason?  Exactly the same as Matt Rowe in his article at the American Thinker entitled Against the Convention of States.

Many folks calling for a Convention of States (COS) to solve our country’s current political problems are making a fatal assumption about the purpose of COS. They see this as a powerful mechanism for undoing political corruption at the federal level. Unfortunately, a COS is not the tool to handle this particular problem and, under current conditions, could easily lead to a very different US Constitution that actually supports rather than prohibits common government activities.

First, what we want changed is typically not clearly defined. Are COS supporters hoping for term limits (congressional and judicial), the abolition of federal agencies, changing the interstate commerce clause, or altering the 2nd Amendment? Let’s assume these are just some examples they would cite. I won’t go into them here, but each of these and many other issues were thoroughly considered and documented by the Founders who had very clear explanations for why they chose to write the Constitution the way they did.

Second, the several states have not surrendered these powers to the federal government. This is a very important point. Rather, by force of interpretation and the general lack of constitutional knowledge in our country, the federal government has usurped these powers a little at a time—clearly in violation of the constitutional limits placed on that government.

Let me repeat “…clearly in violation of the constitutional limits placed on that government.”

So, if the government is already acting against the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, which they are, why wouldn't they act against any other Amendments that try to block them? This is what I mean by a COS being ineffective. As with crime being a criminal control problem, not a gun control problem, so the problem is a lack of respect for the law by the people who make the law. So, on the one hand, voters get what they voted for. But let's not place the full blame on voters. The fact is that many politicians hide their true nature from the public and in the case of Democrats, they have a large protective screen around them.

A runaway convention is completely possible. There is no rule stated in Article V of the Constitution limiting the scope of a COS. The fact that 3/4 of the several states have not agreed on a purpose for COS is not the point. In fact, there is evidence indicating the Founders fully expected any COS to operate exactly as the original constitutional convention. They clearly placed all the power in the people and those people who are empowered to participate in a COS have no limitations, other than the later ratification of proposed amendments by 3/4 of the several states.

In other words, anything is possible, except probably, a limited issue Convention of the States.

And that is what I mean by dangerous. The Left will be involved, they can't be excluded. And they will maneuver the COS such that what comes out will not be what the people actually want. Imagine if Nancy Pelosi had managed to Federalize elections? Now imagine that that attempt becomes a Constitutional Amendment? How about the elimination of the Electoral College? Anything is possible, and your worst nightmares are probable. Tourot just tells us why a COS is a really terrible idea. He also offers solutions, that not only make a COS unnecessary, but would bring us back to following the Constitution we already have.

We must address the lack of Judeo-Christian morals and education, a lack the Founders knew was the only way their new country could fall from within.

We must ensure that we teach our citizens what the US Constitution actually says, why it says that, and how it works.

We must vote against and actively oppose political ideas that do not fit within the scope of our Constitution.

We must hold politicians, government functionaries, and their suitors accountable for misdeeds.

We must take the golden eggs out of serving in Congress—no more millionaires clubs.

We must remove power from the federal agencies that regularly overstep their authority for lack of oversight and statutory limitations.

We must work to return power to the states and, ultimately, to the people.

Some years ago, South Africa was looking to rewrite their constitution. One wit suggested we give them ours. After all, he said, we weren't using it.