Conservatives are generally in agreement that we are a nation approaching a crisis. We may not agree on the timeline, but we know it’s coming. Individual liberty and self-governance cannot coexist with the runaway spending, disregard of enacted laws, and violation of civil rights which our federal government is undertaking. This crisis is the natural outcome of our government escaping the accountability which is supposed to keep it answerable to us. If we fail to respond effectively to this challenge, prosperity, freedom, and justice will cease to exist. We had better agree on a plan to deal with it.
Our republic is unique because both individual rights and state sovereignty are protected by the Constitution. Power is intended to be shared shared as a check on federal overreach. Our founders planned for
- The House of Representatives to represent the people,
- The Senate to represent the states,
- The executive to administer the will of both, and
- The court to ensure it’s all done consistent with individual and state rights.
But the states lost much of their power when the 17th Amendment was enacted. Popular election of Senators placed them in service to the citizens rather than the states. State representation in the U.S. Congress was lost.
Accountability was further lost when both the executive and judicial branches seized legislative authorities. The executive branch implements its own laws via regulation, and simply ignores the laws from the legislature that it doesn’t favor. The judiciary has become a super-legislature by “interpreting” things in the Constitution that aren’t actually written in it. This has all conspired to undermine accountability – enabling government lawlessness which will eventually destroy our republic. Power has shifted from the states to a federal government which is no longer accountable to anyone. Without correction, our days as a self-governed republic are numbered.
In their wisdom, our founders anticipated this crisis, and provided the states with a Constitutional – and peaceful – means to reassert control over an out-of-control federal government. The 2nd clause of Article V of the Constitution allows the states to initiate and control the amendment process – without the consent of the federal government. Via amendments, the states can change the rules under which the federal government must operate, thus restoring the balance of power, and returning the federal government to its proper role – serving rather than ruling us.
To exercise that authority, 34 states must call for an Article V convention of states to propose amendments to the Constitution. At the convention, delegates sent by the states will propose amendments, which are then sent to the states for ratification. Upon ratification by 38 states, convention proposals become binding amendments to the Constitution. The federal government’s only role in the process is to set the time and location for the convention. It has no authority to deny a convention, nor to participate in the convention/ratification process. There are currently 19 states which have passed resolutions calling for an Article V convention.
I am personally involved in promoting an Article V convention in Idaho. This past March, we were allowed to testify before the Idaho State Senate Judiciary and Rules Committee. I was shocked at the number of conservatives who testified against a convention of states. Various conservative advocacy groups, legal scholars, and even the Republican party argued that state action is much too risky. They argued that:
- It would trigger a “runaway convention” in which our entire Constitution could be jettisoned. Professor Robert Natelson has thoroughly debunked this myth in his book “The Law of Article V.”
- It would enshrine nonsense like climate change in the Constitution – though opponents can’t explain how such radical proposals would garner ratification by 38 states.
- It would empower the gun grabbers to cancel the 2nd Amendment – though a simulation of the convention showed it more likely to do the opposite.
- That the 2nd clause of Article V is no longer actionable because it has never been used – failing to see that it has never been used because the federal government has never been as unresponsive to our wishes as it is now.
- That the late Justice Scalia was opposed to a convention of states – except that he wasn’t. He was against a rewrite of the Constitution, but he was in favor of amending it via the 2nd clause of Article V. He argued that we are overdue for a convention of states to remind the federal government that the states still have power over it.
However, there is one thing the critics never present: a plan to avert the approaching crisis.
There are only 4 possible responses to our government’s descent into tyranny:
- Express our will via debate and elections – and hope the government cares;
- Change the rules of government operations to enforce behavior consistent with self-governance and founding principles;
- Surrender to tyranny – accepting that the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness is now in our past; or
- Fight.
We’ve been attempting to prevent the approaching crisis electorally for decades. Good election outcomes haves slowed our march towards national suicide. But after bad elections, it has accelerated again. Since the early 20th century, we have failed to arrest our march towards the cliff.
Opponents of a convention of states are arguing that we should continue to do the same thing that we’ve been doing for decades (elections), while hoping for a better result. But hope is not a strategy. It is a plan for failure. Assuming we’re not ready to go quietly into servitude, that leaves one peaceful way to avert the crisis – change the rules to reestablish accountability. Amend the Constitution and shift power back to the states – but it must be done before the Constitution is dead.
The “change the rules” option has an expiration date. We don’t know what that date is, but it will have arrived when the Constitution no longer has enough authority for enforcement. The Biden administration recently argued before the Supreme Court that the Constitution shouldn’t constrain the government’s ability to censor speech. We don’t know what the justices will decide, but some seemed receptive to the argument. Leftist legal scholars are arguing that “popular Constitutionalism” gives the President the authority to reinterpret our Constitution – finding things like a right to abortion or unwritten limitations to the 2nd Amendment. If those arguments win out, the Constitution will become meaningless, and the authority it grants the states to assert control over the federal government will be lost. The “change the rules” option to reign in our government will not be available forever. And yet opponents are more afraid of allowing the states to act, than allowing the federal government to continue unrestrained – while at the same time complaining about the result.
The radicals who have taken over our government seem determined to force us into a binary decision: submit or fight. Article V critics respond by insisting that we not change strategies – just keep voting for “America first” political candidates, and hope we get a different result “this time.” This leaves me with a question for Article V convention opponents: have you given up, are you insane, or are you just itching for a war?
Author Bio: John Green is a retired engineer and political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He spent his career designing complex defense systems, developing high performance organizations, and doing corporate strategic planning. He can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Substack: American Free News Network Substack
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA