URGENT: Con-Con rescission resolution HCR 9 is still pending in the New Hampshire Senate, and the last day for legislative activity in the chamber is Thursday, May 23. This important resolution, which passed the House of Representatives in March, needs 16 senators to support it in order to be formally introduced in the Senate. If we are to protect the U.S. Constitution from attempts to radically rewrite it, it is imperative that HCR 9 be enacted. Please contact your state senators, and urge them to support this important resolution and ensure that it’s formally introduced and passed in the New Hampshire Senate!
Members of the New Hampshire General Court are attempting to pass legislation to rescind every live application to Congress calling for a convention to propose amendments, under Article V of the Constitution, otherwise known as a constitutional convention (Con-Con).
House Concurrent Resolution 9 (HCR 9) is sponsored by state Representative Nikki McCarter (R-Belknap).
HCR 9 would rescind New Hampshire’s sole live application for a constitutional convention, HCR 40 (passed on May 31, 2012), which applies for a so-called Balanced Budget Amendment.
HCR 9 declares:
Whereas, the constitution of the United States of America has been amended many times in the history of this nation and may be amended many more times, without the need to resort to an Article V constitutional convention, and has been interpreted for more than two hundred years and has been found to be a sound document which protects the lives and liberties of the citizens; and
Whereas, there is great danger in subjecting our form of government, which is based on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to sweeping changes that would undermine its philosophical foundation of instituting government based on the principle of securing God-given rights….
HCR 9 is correct. Any Article V convention, no matter how well intentioned, could lead to a runaway convention and reverse many of the Constitution’s limitations on government power and interference. In other words, a Con-Con 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.
Additionally, in the last years of his life, the late Justice Antonin Scalia stood opposed to an Article V convention. Asked about it in a 2015 interview, he remarked that “This is not a good century to write a constitution.” Furthermore, what kind of delegates would New Hampshire 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.
An Article V constitutional convention is unnecessary to protect individual liberty and limit the size and scope of government. If anything, a constitutional convention would more than likely undermine those protections and increase the size and scope of the federal government rather than impose any meaningful limitations on its jurisdiction, as the resolution purportedly seeks to accomplish. The massive expansion of government and growing infringements on our liberties are not because of “problems” or “flaws” with the Constitution, but rather due to misinterpretation, wrongful application, or lack of enforcement altogether. If applied faithfully and accurately, in accordance with its original meaning, at least 80 percent of the federal government’s programs would likely be found unconstitutional. This fact negates any reason for convening an Article V convention today. The correct solution is constitutional enforcement, not a constitutional convention.
Rather than passing Article V convention applications, which risk a runaway convention threatening our God-given rights and individual liberty, the General Court should consider Article VI and nullify unconstitutional laws. Above all, urge your state senator to support HCR 9, rescind all Article V convention applications, and to consider nullification as a safe and constitutional means to limit government instead.
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.
