Comments 1 - 6 of 6 Search these comments
states the power to call a convention to propose amendments.
Our convention would only allow the states to discuss amendments that, “limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints, and place term limits on federal officials.”
Wouldn't you just need 1 person from Congress if the states called on Congress to do it? It says, 2/3 of both houses, OR the states call for it. Since the 2nd condition is met, there is no minimum number from Congress specified at that point.
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..
tanked says
Wouldn't you just need 1 person from Congress if the states called on Congress to do it? It says, 2/3 of both houses, OR the states call for it. Since the 2nd condition is met, there is no minimum number from Congress specified at that point.
No.
And you are wrong about the States calling for the convention, btw.
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..
Regardless of which Amendment route, Congress gets the actual ball rolling.
Note the word "Shall" in terms of 2/3 of the states voting for a convention. "Shall" has a very special legal meaning - it is mandatory. If 2/3 of the states call a convention, then Congress is legally compelled by the Constitution to call for a Convention.
Good idea, but their site includes Google spyware, which you can verify by looking at the html source.
Also, Article V of the Constitution does not seem to let the states act independently without Congress: