Citizen Writers Fighting Censorship by Helping Americans Understand Issues Affecting the Republic.
f our elections have been corrupted, can we vote our way back into good governance? Trust in elections is critical, because a peaceful transfer of power depends on broad acceptance of election results. Yet trust is slipping, because there is ample reason to remain suspicious.
Most churches loath getting involved in politics – and not only because it jeopardizes their tax-exempt status. They understandably prefer to focus their efforts on matters of the soul rather than of the body.
Last month we experienced a weekend of protest. Apparently, the protesters don’t want America to be ruled by kings. But the protesters seemed unconcerned about unelected government officials who are acting more like kings every day — our federal judges.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk should have clarified one thing for all thoughtful Americans. Civil debate is a threat to the radical forces seeking to fundamentally transform America.
When we face the Almighty one day, will we receive praise for using every gift available to “Be fruitful and multiply,” or will we receive scorn for burying our talent?
What do you call a government in which the voters are only allowed to choose between “option a” and “option b” but not “option c”? It is an aristocracy, in which the elites restrict the choices of the electorate, to only approved options.
Of all the arguments that Article V convention opponents put forth, I find those that use their faith in God as justification against amending the Constitution to be the most disingenuous.
Sir Isaac Newton posited that “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” My teachers taught it as a law of physics. But it turns out that it applies to 21st century American politics to: For every executive action, there is an equal and opposite judicial injunction.
Self-governance advocates have always supported robust debate, where the pros and cons of competing ideas are discussed, and voters are allowed to make informed decisions. Conversely, in recent years, it has been the anti-democratic radicals who shout down speakers, claiming that their ideas are too dangerous to be heard. That is, until an Article V convention is the subject. Then the roles reverse.
Honest answers to a few basic questions will lead the faithful to the inevitable conclusion that we have a moral duty to use ALL means available to prevent government overreach from encroaching on our God given rights.
It bothers me when someone uses another person’s name and reputation to advance their own position, without the other’s consent or agreement. Yet that is a favorite tactic of Article V convention opponents – frequently attributing convention of states opposition to the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
Our current federal debt stands at nearly 37 trillion dollars. That’s more than a “37” with 12 zeroes behind it. It’s an amount of money which is nearly impossible for the human mind to grasp.
On March 12, 2025, Idaho chose to stay on the sidelines. The Idaho House of Representatives decided that they would not use their Article V power to join 19 other states calling for term limits, fiscal restraints, and restrictions on government overreach. For now, Idaho will be sitting this battle out
This year, the Idaho legislature will consider a resolution to join 19 other states calling for an Article V convention to propose Constitutional amendments. As momentum for the resolution builds, an army of opponents will argue against it using the rationale provided by globalization advocates.
If you’re remembering John F. Kennedy’s historic speech, and wondering, “What can I do for my country?” – it’s quite simple. Give your state legislators a call and let them know that history is calling.
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. We had better agree on a plan to deal with it.
A commonly expressed concern about an Article V convention of states, it that it could undermine our 2nd Amendment rights. The reality is that an Article V convention is far more likely to strengthen our ability to bear arms, than to undermine it.
Conducting an Article V convention, and obtaining ratification of proposals, would be a herculean effort. But getting 38 states to agree with the necessity of imposing accountability on Washington, seems much more achievable than attempting to use the federal government to take corrective action on the federal government.
Despite being notably absent from extensive discussions at the Constitutional Convention, the Article V, Convention of the States provision garnered unanimous approval, reflecting the framers’ foresight.
Out of control government is a concern that crosses all political boundaries – making a convention of states a truly bipartisan initiative.