patrick.net

Best part is that the Libs have zero clue what a constitutional convention will mean for them:

Patrick says

states the power to call a convention to propose amendments.

No. The state's have the power to call on Congress to call for a convention. But there is no enforcement mechanism to make Congress actually do it.

SCOTUS tells them to? Congress can still say 'fuck you' in response. Sure it would cause a Constitutional crisis. But they would rather have that than loose power. Esp. since it would be highly likely the Senate might face a 17th amendment repeal as an outcome from said convention.

Patrick says

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.”

No such limitation can be enforced. Conventions can rewrite the whole damn constitution if they want.

That's what happened at the convention called for to make 'limited reforms' to our first constitution, the Articles of Confederation. Instead, we got an entirely new constitution -- our current one.

This site is just grifting for donation money...or will soon be. Or, they are serious and purposely omitting the above facts in order to get people amenable to a 'limited' convention via the same bait & switch tactic that was successful 237 years ago.

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.

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.

UkraineIsFucked says

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.

stereotomy says

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.

Hahahahaha. What are courts gonna do? Congress doesn't even follow its own rules.

https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1931114327236608455

Even if a third party could avoid simply splitting the right (as the Whigs once did), there's no reason to believe it would escape the fate of every "principled" movement that came before. Washington sucks almost everyone into the swamp.

The problem has never been the party label. It's the system that makes them indistinguishable once they reach power. That machine has to be dismantled.

The most effective way to do that IMO is by going upstream and using the tool the Founders gave us for exactly this situation: Article V of the Constitution.

Install reform-minded legislatures in just 15 more states, and we can force a Convention of States. With that, we can impose term limits, strip D.C. of its ability to manufacture lifetime political careers, and finally break the cycle for good.

This is faster, cheaper, and far more likely to succeed than building a new party and hoping it doesn’t get eaten alive in the swamp.

Rotate out DC politicians with 12 year term limits (two Senate terms or six house terms) before they can fully develop their corrupt networks.

https://patrick.net/post/1303173/2017-02-19-patrick-s-platform

Patrick says

Even if a third party could avoid simply splitting the right (as the Whigs once did),

Whigs we're not a third party.