Polls

A commentary giving a comprehensive explanation of the Article V Convention of States issue was recently published in the November/December issue of the AMAC Magazine, and this movement is gaining traction all over the country. How do you feel about the Convention of States?

Sponsored by:

If You Enjoy Polls Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1K Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wayne Hilchen
Wayne Hilchen
4 years ago

I’m a district captain in Minnesota. We are working together with other people who view COS a good way to involve we the people through our states representatives and senators. We’d like the COS project resolution to move out of committee this coming MN legislative session for a vote. It takes work and support from those who favor COS.

JoAnne Froemming
JoAnne Froemming
4 years ago

A Convention of States can only propose AMENDMENTS to the Constitution and 2/3 of the states needs to improve them; it’s highly unlikely that the Constitution itself could be altered. And, YES, I agree with Theresa C. that we need a government that will follow the existing Constitution!!

Linda Wedgeworth
Linda Wedgeworth
4 years ago

Term limits for all politicians. We don’t need lifers.

Bob
Bob
21 days ago

An Article V convention, would go a long way to solving some of the long term problems we have in this country. We can see how the administration has in many cases, bent the rules, in other cases completely broken the rules and in almost every case, the average American citizen is worse off for it. It is time to use the Constitution to FIX the Constitution. This is the reason the framers (unanimously) included this provision, in the event our government forgot they derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Pelosi and Schumer have nothing to do with the convention and have no say in the convention. The problem is out of control government. It is time for We the People, to call an Article V convention.

Steve
Steve
4 years ago

Re the Convention of States. In many ways our government has overstepped its boundary and has obligated taxpayers to a consistently growing debt that well exceeds cost of living increases.
In additon, our government considers its key responsibility to seek out and solve the problems of any economic minority by increasing tax upon the middle class and the well-to-do. Increasingly,
government defines middle class to the point that this group is shrinking and more than 50% of the population pays no tax., if we convene a group to rewrite our constitution,.
Consequently, I greatly fear that it will be written to create a socialistic society. Todays society will attempt to convince us that we can take care of all of us. The truth is that we all need to understand
that we get only what we work for.

Arnie
Arnie
4 years ago

The second choice, which was closest to my viewpoint, should have said, “The Convention of States is dangerous because it WILL [not MAY] get out of hand, changing our country for the worse.” And the referenced AMAC magazine article was pro-convention biased and gave only a cursory representation of the cons of calling a second constitutional convention. Patriotic friends of mine at Principled Policy Institute have done extensive research on the topic, for those who are interested in becoming educated.

A “convention of states” is a bad idea. Sorry, but a “convention of states” IS a constitutional convention. In fact the term, “Convention of States,” is not found in Article V at all, period. The Constitution’s authors wrote the convention call provision into Article V as an escape clause, in case history showed their document to be completely flawed. A supermajority of the states could then demand congress call another convention to propose amendments and, essentially, rewrite the document to fix it.

So, since Congress calls the convention, at the request of the states, they can choose the delegate qualifications, also. Although a Con-con might be charged to produce only amendments, it has lawful authority to rework the whole constitution if the delegates choose to do so. With a convention comprised of today’s Democrats, neocon Republicans, and Bernie wannabes, there is no guarantee that the delegates to the con-con would follow limits imposed upon them. Remember, the first convention in the 1700s was convened to ONLY AMEND the Articles of Confederation; amendments to which required 100% ratification by the states. Yet history shows they did much more, and changed the ratification requirement to only 75%. This time there may not be ratification requirements included in the results. There goes your 13 state safety net.

There are many socialist/left statists seeking this con-con. For instance, Lawrence Lessig, a leftist Harvard law professor, wants some left wing amendments included, too. That doesn’t bode well for the results that would happen this time around. He’s likely hoping for a con-con free for all.

Thankfully the founders did a good job on the rewrite in the 18th century. Let’s not put our liberties at risk in the 21st. Rather, America needs to elect to congress those who will abide by the current Constitution, according to the author’s intentions. Most of the current group can’t seem to follow the Constitution with the amendments it has now.

Dan W.
Dan W.
4 years ago

Who do you trust to write a viable Constitution:

A) James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. or;
B) Mitch and Nancy and their assorted minions at the national, state, and local levels ?

Case closed.

Brian B
Brian B
4 years ago

Be prepared for an infusion of Leftist propaganda if a Convention of States is realized. The usual Social Engineers will perpetuate the Communist deception of a “cradle to grave” economic utopia. And thanks to our nation’s secular moral sickness, we already have a generation of children who think socialism is preferable. American voters have a dismal record of believing the toxic FDR propaganda of “a chicken in every pot” ……ie. that the government exists to fix all their problems. There is a better way going forward: Remove all Communist professors from our nation’s Federally Funded schools and universities, and teach the Rising Generation the Judeo/Christian historical lessons that influenced and inspired the authors of our nation’s Founding Documents. A secular nation that is indoctrinated with selfishness, and thinks it is OK to murder babies is incapable of fixing anything.

Skipper Stiglet
Skipper Stiglet
4 years ago

I being a conservative am really surprised that more Democrats haven’t jumped on board the Convention of States discussions, petitions and donations. They are wanting to change the 1st amendment, limit term limits, this is how to do it

Candace Warren
Candace Warren
4 years ago

If a Convention of states is the only way to limit the power of Congress through their longstanding corruption, then, SO BE IT.

Theresa Camoriano
Theresa Camoriano
4 years ago

What we really need is not a convention of states to rewrite the Constitution but a country that adheres to the Constitution we already have.

Tom M
Tom M
4 years ago

The Marxists are going to force the country to split apart. The corruption in the DC Swamp has gone past the point of no return. Congress is only out for itself and each state is going to have to decide where it stands. The left, aided and abetted by the RINOs have ruined the country.

Don Davis
Don Davis
4 years ago

This is one of the biggest mistakes you can make, do not expose our constitution to destruction by uncontrollable delegates. Just enforce the constitution we have. What makes you think the government will obey a new constitution when they will not obey the one we already have. Remember, doing the same thing over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Those who want to change the constitution have an ulterior motive. We do not need to amend the constitution, just enforce the one we have. Our founders issued strict warnings about any effort to amend the constitution, or “con-con” as it is called. About 80% of all that the Federal Government does is not authorized by the enumerated powers expressly stated in the constitution, i.e. Environment, Education, Labor, Health & Human Services, etc., etc. Therefore, we should enforce the limit of the Constitution’s enumerated powers to any Federal power and return the rest to the States as required by the Constitution. A new amendment could not say it any better. The ORIGINAL delegates to the constitutional convention were given instructions to only amend the Articles of Confederation (our first Constitution); the result was a completely new Constitution. We could wind up with another “new” constitution (the UN already has one they will recommend, that should scare the HELL out of everyone) or we could wind up with the Communist Manifesto. The amendment process would be determined by the Congress and there is nothing to prevent them from appointing themselves as delegates. If delegates are appointed by the States, they cannot be controlled, they have unfettered authority to change the Constitution (defined as plenipotentiary powers). VERY BAD IDEA! Who among you would want the Congress, who are best known for self enrichment, sexual harassment, pedophilia, immunity from their own laws, corruption, favoritism, nepotism, etc., to have authority over the amendment of the Constitution???

Orville Figgs
Orville Figgs
4 years ago

While a Convention of States may sound like a good idea, in my opinion, it’s not. I believe we would be putting the God given rights we currently have at risk, a very high risk.
We need to work with what we have at the present until the pie in the sky ideas are shown for what they are.
The United States citizens need to learn about our Constitution and that FREEDOM isn’t really free. I know that sounds like some political speech, but we all need to think about it, really think about it.
I believe the current thinking that Socialism may be the way to go is very wrong. Socialism has never worked. Let me repeat that, in the 147 times Socialism has been attempted, it has never worked.
As Margaret Thatcher stated,”Socialism works, right up until you run out of other people’s money.” I believe this is the best description of Socialism I have ever heard.
It’s like the idea of universal health care for everyone. Doesn’t that sound great?
But the reality is how do you pay for universal health care for everyone?
Do you make doctors, nurses and other health care providers slaves?
Who decides?
When you put humans in charge of something as complex as universal health care, some people are going to get more than others. That is just a fact and the idea of universal health care for everyone goes out the window.
So at this point in time, convening a Convention of States, puts the God given freedoms and rights we currently have at too great of a risk and we could lose everything, becoming a Totalitarian nation ruled by the establishment ruling class elites.
Why don’t we enforce what we have. If it’s not really broken, let’s not attempt to fix it.

BobA
BobA
4 years ago

We can’t afford to trust the future of our Constitution to a group of people who, in my opinion, are attempting to change our nation. Either a conservative or liberal in this current political atmosphere can damage our Constitution forever.

Beth Barton
Beth Barton
4 years ago

If we don’t use Article V, we will lose our freedom in the US.

Ang
Ang
4 years ago

The states need to “establish” (Amendment 1) Biblical Christianity as the National Religion and conduct all affairs and policies according to scriptural principles.

Roger Tigner
Roger Tigner
4 years ago

There is no one today that will stand for WE THE PEOPLE as our forefathers did in the face of tyranny, they were one of us. A convention will ripe that. Our Constitution has all that is needed to stop government over reach. Change it to our demise.

David Smith
David Smith
4 years ago

We must find a way to reign in the ruling elite who deem themselves the permanent government and now have more power than our elected representatives. Along with this imbalance we have representatives who have ceded their authority and oversight responsibilities to agencies.

Terry
Terry
4 years ago

Would be hijacked by left-wing demoncrats

Robin Ford
Robin Ford
4 years ago

Pelosi and the rest of her gang have already stretched the boundaries of the Constitution as far as they will go and more. Look at all the many amendments there are already! I pray in November that most of them will be voted out – I would like to see them all voted out but once we regain the house and hold the Senate then this article could come in very handy as a stepping stone of correcting all loop holes that the left has been using to get around the real meaning and doing things their way and call it Constitutional! If you read the Article – it takes 2/3 vote of BOTH houses – that will never happen right now.
Article V
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, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Tom H.
Tom H.
4 years ago

1) End all the current unconstitutional activity of the Federal Gov. with existing State powers such as nullification.
2) See if we need to change anything else.

Why would we expect the States to hold down the Federal Gov. to a modified Constitution when they don’t do it with the Constitution we have ?
Who’s going to enforce the restrictions of a modified Constitution ? The U.N. ?
I still don’t get it.
Your poll is missing the option “This is pointless media-generating theater” and is a push-poll, but I guess I have to vote that it’s “dangerous”, even though I just think it’s stupid.

J GRAHAM
J GRAHAM
4 years ago

I believe the risks outweigh the rewards. We aleady have laws and methods in place, we just need to use them. We are too divided, as a nation, to have a convention that would benefit our country. Just look at the impeachment mess going on right now and you can see the impossibility of it.

Martyn Babitz
Martyn Babitz
4 years ago

The problem with a Convention is that it could result in massive unfavorable overhaul and re-writing of the Constitution by those controlling such a convention that may well be opposed to the principles of liberty, opportunity and restraint of government power that are part of the current Constitution. What is needed is an approach that has only nugatory, rather than expansive, effect over existing disregard of the Constitution by the federal government and that approach is Nullification by one or more states of federal laws, rulings and actions that violate the reserved sovereign powers of the states and their people.

C.McL
C.McL
4 years ago

There was a purpose for the convention of the states being written into our constitution!

The only was to set term limits on our elected congress people is via vote in convention of the states! It is onecway we the people can actually have a voice again.

We need congressional term limits set , 2 terms like our president is perfect, and made retrocative !!
It is the only way to get this country back on track…
our forefathers never intended to have this country under the long term and absolute control of the same people for generations.

So toward that aim a constitution of the states is excellent and should be called for immediately

Frank C
Frank C
4 years ago

The Convention of states may be a dangerous and very cumbersome effort. However, we can see that this Congress is not doing its job. Someone needs to do what is necessary for the good of the country. If Congress does not step up and do the work of the Congress, it may be necessary to depend upon a convention of states.

Paul DAscenz
Paul DAscenz
4 years ago

I’m in full agreement! Follow the Constitution of the United States of America as written.

cmhpablo
cmhpablo
4 years ago

Nobody today in America could improve on the U.S. Constitution. The same guiding Spirit that inspired Our Bible inspired Our Constitution. The Founding Fathers were led by The Holy Spirit Of GOD, whether or not they knew it, and too many people in the Nation now don’t know what that means.

Joe704
Joe704
4 years ago

How does this statement hold up? “The Convention of States is a useful check on runaway federal power.” Just think about how congress has driven the government into the condition we are now facing. We are going to trust more politicians (Yes folks. They will likely be politicians appointed by other politicians.) to change our foundations to correct this problem? How about we start following what was originally written before it was twisted by greedy little men and women?

Patricia
Patricia
4 years ago

Can’t believe so many on here are against a convention of states.If you research, you will find that only conservative ‘s advocate for it. One big supporter is Mark Levine. Sounds like most on here are buying the left’s propaganda. It would take 38 states to change law. How else do you think we will EVER get term limits in congress??? Stop drinking the left’s koolaid.

John E Tissot
John E Tissot
4 years ago

I want term limits for all of CONGRESS, HOUSE AN SENATE. I also want SENATORS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE GOVERNOR OF EACH STATE. WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE STATE’S HOUSE AN SENATE.

Brad Pittam
Brad Pittam
4 years ago

I am already a member of convention of states here in Arizona. I wish more people from all states would see the importance of a convention being called now because its evident the sitting members of Congress won’t make the changes needed today, and badly needed I must say. We need term limits to combat corruption of members of Congress. There’s no need for them to be paid the rest of their lives either. It’s not originally intended to be a career. It started as volunteer and changed because of growth of our country, but there is no need to have the same senator or house member for 15, 20 or 40 years. Fresh voices would be good. Stopping the corruption and their sole concentration on reelection instead of addressing our issues is sadly necessary to reinstitute into their agendas. Join Convention of States and let’s fix our broken branch of government. HELP US America!

Joseph T Moffitt
Joseph T Moffitt
4 years ago

Been an advocate supporter for 10 years, takes a long time to get 34 states on board, state senators are about themselves and self interests it’s our republics only salvation if not we are doomed. “Its ours if we can keep it”, destruction from within is real today

Dean Burwell
Dean Burwell
4 years ago

I don’t want to rewrite the Constitution. I just want 2 amendments. One to put in term limits, and the other to force every law that Congress passes to apply to all Congress people!

Dennis Feyhl
Dennis Feyhl
4 years ago

Term limits need to happen. A convention of states is necessary.

Bruce Bielfelt
Bruce Bielfelt
4 years ago

Agree with most of the rest against a convention.
The only thing I would want changed is the 14th Amendment allowing for any baby born in the U.S. to be designated a citizen. Not sure how that can be changed but it needs to have a sunset clause. The slavery issue, thank God and the Republican Party is dead in the United States. The reason for the 14th Amendment was to allow the offspring of former slaves to become citizens. That and that alone.

Duane
Duane
4 years ago

You can bet the criminal socialist communist radical liberal gangsters will be in full force at any convention of states to push down the throats their utopian evil ideology on everyone else! Look at what they are doing currently in state legislature’s around the country in passing laws against the Electoral College and second amendment gun rights, etc.!!! IT REALLY DOES MATTER WHO WE VOTE FOR!!!!

Jeff
Jeff
4 years ago

The Article 5 Convention of States has 1 purpose; To restore the power of the people over our oGovernment…

Randy Fischer
Randy Fischer
4 years ago

George Mason Delegate to the Constitutional Convention from New York proposed part two to Article V and it passed unanimously. It preserves the power of the people to check a tyrannical government short of an armed insurrection. It is the “fire alarm” to wake up people. It is time to pull it. Learn about it ConventionofStates.com

Mark
Mark
4 years ago

I do not understand how more than 350 people would vote “I do not have strong feelings either way about the Convention of States” and “Not sure”, wasting time (their) instead of rendering a simple opinionated vote!

Vicki
Vicki
4 years ago

I am actually working on this and feel that BOTH parties have proven that they cannot control spending. They are spending money we do NOT have which if we did the same we would be in prison. They are ignoring the constitution and this needs to be stopped. They are flexing their muscles and federal overreach is getting out of hand. Altogether, we need to step in and get control of this and explain to them that we elect them to do their jobs not to control us. I believe that term limits is a start, they will not get comfortable and feel their power like some have. We will get new blood to do new exciting things instead of the same old same old. We can demand fiscal restraint and that they stop the over reach.

Kerry Moore
Kerry Moore
4 years ago

Instead of changing the Constitution, our elected should start following the one we have!

Ernest Cismowski
Ernest Cismowski
4 years ago

I beg you to at least peruse the data generated by the John Birch Society.The changes in our gov’t plausible by leftist influences on such a convention would be very bad for our Republic and possibly foment civil war.

Charlotte M Manis
Charlotte M Manis
4 years ago

I hope to ask any candidate who is running for an office if they support the CoStates and their positions. I will only vote for them if they do.

Richard
Richard
4 years ago

Obviously people miss the point and level of Article V.
Though reffernce to elected federal level persons. It seems people fear their local Reps too.
Ask a young person if they want to continue to trust the the government by paying into SS. Or have that same payment placed in their own personal account.
It is a no brianer. The voters will decide. This is why “they” fear Article V. And attempt to have voters fear it. As if “the fear of” is not already in place.
The “fears” about Article V is the reason for Article V’s existence. People here are all in agreement. The fear is a reallity.
Article V was created to combat the reallity of the fear.
Article V puts more control into the people’s hands. Not total control. As Reps on all levels do have. Not having total control is what “they” fear. Why would the “little guy” fear this?

Mark
Mark
4 years ago

I am a supporter of the Convention of States as specified in Article V of our constitution. I believe it is America’s only hope to rein in an out of control bloated and tyrannical government. The federal government isn’t going to police itself. It will not impose term limits on itself, control spending, consider other problems that are detrimental to the republic. My campaign contributions do not go to any political party or candidate. They do however, go to the Convention of States Action.

Russ Rudolph
Russ Rudolph
4 years ago

Unfortunately the days of the United 50 States is coming to a close. The split in ideology is too great and we will no longer be able to work together. Whether there will be a civil separation or a war has yet to be seen.

Anne
Anne
4 years ago

I am fully in agreement with the last comment. My representative just passed a law that bars the president from declaring war. If Steny Hoyer had read the Constitution he would know already that the president can’t declare war-only Congress can. It is already in the rules of the Constitution. How stupid! That is why Viet Nam was never a war-Congress never declared that it was, so, Constitutionally, none of our boys needed to go over there and get killed. Maybe we should have a test on the Constitution and make every elected official take. Those who fail the test have to leave office. Wouldn’t that be great!
Unless those presiding over a convention of the states understand the Constitution, and adhere to it, it will be a fiasco. All the convention has to do is to get rid of every unconstitutional law, take away the powers that the federal government has not right to have and get back to the basics. We don’t need another Constitution as we already have one. We can use that document to force the Federal Government back to its original powers and take away the powers that they have taken upon themselves and give those powers back to the states and the people. Read the tenth amendment and get rid of the 17th amendment and we will be back to a Republic form of government again and back on the right track.

Ernest Cismowski
Ernest Cismowski
4 years ago

Read pros and cons. Corrections/changes/reforms in our gov’t can be effected in ways without the dangers possible in a constitutional convention.

Rolland Schmidt
Rolland Schmidt
4 years ago

I do not trust any Senator or congressman, no matter what political party they claim to be with, to do the right thing for our country!

1K
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x