URGENT: The 2024 Iowa Legislative Session is winding down, but it’s imperative that we continue contacting state legislators in opposition to a disastrous Article V constitutional convention, or Con-Con. Please contact your state legislators, and urge them to oppose all Con-Con resolutions, regardless of the ostensible subject.
Iowa state legislators are seeking to pass resolutions applying to Congress to “call a Convention for proposing Amendments,” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, otherwise known as a federal constitutional convention (Con-Con) or “convention of states,” as some erroneously refer to it.
House Joint Resolution 7 (HJR 7) and Senate Joint Resolution 7 (SJR 7) follow the wording of Mark Meckler’s Convention of States (COS) Project application to Congress to call a constitutional convention. An explanation of the resolutions, contained in HJR 7 and SJR 7, read:
This joint resolution constitutes an application requesting the United States Congress to call a constitutional convention in order to propose amendments to the Constitution of the United States to impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for federal officials and for members of Congress. The resolution constitutes a continuing application to call a constitutional convention.
House File 336 (HF 336; originally numbered HF 34), House File 2116 (HF 2116), and Senate File 2130 (SF 2130) have also been introduced. These bills are designed to give false assurance that a convention won’t get out of control, doing this by ostensibly regulating the appointment and conduct of delegates (referred in the bill as “commissioners”). Such a bill would be completely useless at preventing a runaway convention — for example, the bills don’t regulate delegates from other states, and it doesn’t prevent delegates from proposing an entirely new constitution (in the 1787 Convention, states also attempted to limit delegates’ authority).
These vaguely-worded resolutions claim that the constitutional convention is only “for the specific and exclusive purpose of proposing amendments” about the topics mentioned, reiterating “and no amendments on any other topic” may be proposed beyond the topics listed. However, in reality, any Article V constitutional convention cannot be limited, resulting in a runaway convention that would reverse many of the Constitution’s limitations on government power and interference.
In other words, any Article V convention could accomplish the same goals that many of its advocates claim to be fighting against. As evidence, both a 2016 and 2023 simulated “Convention of States” resulted in amendments massively increasing the federal government and expanding its spending powers.
In the above exclusive interview with The New American, state Representative Helena Hayes (R-Iowa) relays her personal story of how a Convention of States Project (COS) leader and co-founder contacted her and attacked The John Birch Society. During the phone conversation, he also character assassinated JBS Constitutional educator and speaker Robert Brown as being a “house painter,” who lacks the credentials and letters behind his name to understand Article V and the Constitution. Yet this so-called “house painter” is kicking his and COS’s butts so much so that they are resorting to childish name-calling and personal attacks rather than debating the substance of the issue, whether or not the Iowa General Assembly should apply to Congress to call a constitutional convention to propose changes, or amendments, to the U.S. Constitution.
In the interview, Rep. Hayes also shares her shock about how COS put her personal cellphone number in a mass text blast sent to her constituents to contact and pressure her into supporting the COS resolution House Joint Resolution 7, which applies to Congress to call a constitutional convention.
Rep. Hayes further expresses her disappointment with COS-sponsored events that she has attended, in which COS speakers again spend more time attacking groups that oppose a convention, such as The John Birch Society and various JBS speakers, rather than utilizing the time to explain the process of an Article V convention or to educate attendees about the alleged merits of a constitutional convention (Con-Con) to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Rep. Hayes concludes the interview explaining her opposition to HJR 7, the COS Con-Con resolution, and of the idea of using an Article V convention to rein-in the federal government.
The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia also understood the danger of a constitutional convention. While he voiced support for one at a 1979 event, the justice had reversed his opinion by 2014 due to the uncertainty of what could come out of it. In 2015, Scalia reiterated his opposition to an Article V convention, stating “this is not a good century to write a constitution.” Furthermore, what kind of delegates would Iowa send to such a convention? Constitutionalist conservatives or RINO moderates and liberals?
On December 9, 2021, constitutionalist U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), warning against a Con-Con, tweeted:
Show me a single state where Constitutionalists comprise a majority of the state legislature.
At this point in history, an Article V Convention of the States would be a disaster.
In 1979, then-U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, correctly warned about an Article V convention:
If we hold a constitutional convention, every group in the country — majority, minority, middle-of-the-road, left, right, up, down — is going to get its two bits in and we are going to wind up with a constitution that will be so far different from the one we have lived under for 200 years that I doubt that the Republic could continue.
Goldwater is correct. An Article V convention possesses the inherent power to propose any changes to the U.S. Constitution, including drafting and proposing an entirely new “modern” (i.e. socialist) constitution. Instead, the Iowa General Assembly should consider Article VI and nullify unconstitutional laws.
Furthermore, state lawmakers should also consider rescinding any and all previously passed Article V convention applications to Congress, regardless of the desired amendment(s). Passing rescission resolutions will help prevent aggregating past Article V convention applications with those from other states to force Congress to call a convention.
Above all, urge your state representative and senator to oppose HJR 7, SJR 7, HF 336, HF 2116, SF 2130, and all other pro-Article V convention resolutions and to instead consider nullification as a safe and constitutional means to limit government.
Although we provide a way to easily email legislators, we know from long experience that it takes a lot more interaction with your legislators to get your point across than that provided by emails alone.
That's why we provide an easy way not only to email them, but to contact them by phone, tweet, and even video message them.
