Members of the Maryland General Assembly are seeking to pass a resolution applying to Congress to call a convention to propose amendments, under Article V of the Constitution, otherwise known as a constitutional convention (Con-Con), in the 2021 legislative session.
Senate Joint Resolution 7 (SJR 7) would apply to Congress for an Article V convention to propose what it calls the “Democracy Amendment,” “affirming every individual citizen’s right to vote, … reserving constitutional rights to natural persons; or … authorizing the regulation of contributions and expenditures intended to influence elections.” If passed, this resolution would be considered along with the existing Wolf-PAC applications of five other states.
Additionally, HJ 6 has been introduced in the House. It follows the wording of Mark Meckler’s Convention of States Project, or COS Project, application, urging Congress to call a convention to propose amendments “that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for the members of the U.S. Congress.”
SJR 7 and the Wolf-PAC Con-Con applications of other states are interesting because unlike most other Article V convention applications, they are sponsored and supported by liberals and claim to seek liberal policy outcomes, namely campaign finance “reform.” However, these applications illustrate the danger of a Con-Con, particularly that the Left supports a Con-Con and would use one to curtail our God-given liberties.
In the case of SJR 7, its proposed constitutional amendments would roll back the First Amendment’s protections on free speech, including reversing Citizens United v. FEC and related Supreme Court decisions. However, any Article V convention risks limiting our freedoms. This is because any Con-Con could lead to a runaway convention, which could reverse many of the Constitution’s limitations on government power and interference.
Furthermore, despite the name of the proposed “Democracy Amendment,” the word “democracy” does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or in any of the constitutions of the 50 states. This is because the United States’ form of government is a republic, not a democracy. This is affirmed in Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, which states in part: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…”
Regard this progressivist push toward “democracy,” The New American magazine has previously reported:
The anti-republican tendencies of progressives pushing for “democracy” would […] make the states superfluous, adding to the 17th Amendment, which took away the power of the state legislatures to choose their state’s own U.S. senators and changed the system to one where senators are elected by popular vote, meaning the states no longer had any legislators safeguarding their powers. Likewise, the direct election of the president and vice-president threatens to erode what little remaining influence the states have on the federal government. Instead of keeping the United States as a republic, it would be transformed into a united people’s democracy.
As for the idea of convening an Article V convention, the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia 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. In addition to Scalia, George Washington and some of the other founding fathers opposed holding a second constitutional convention.
In particular, James Madison noted in a 1788 letter how extremists and special-interest advocates would hijack a potential second constitutional convention cause great damage to the nation in the process:
If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution, … it would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partizans [sic] on both sides; it wd. probably consist of the most heterogeneous characters; would be the very focus of that flame which has already too much heated men of all parties; would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts but inadmissible in other parts of the Union might have a dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric.
The violent riots observed in multiple American inner cities in mid-2020, along with the increasingly extreme and blatantly Marxist agenda of the Democrat Party, help illustrate what amendments and policies the Left would push for if a Con-Con is successfully called.
It is essential that we preserve the U.S. Constitution since it – as currently-written – contains all the tools needed to prevent tyranny. The massive expansion of government and growing infringements on our liberties is 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% of the federal government’s programs would likely be found unconstitutional.
Urge your state delegate and senator to reject SJR 7 and all other Con-Con bills, and to support the First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution as currently-written.
Although we provide a way to easily email legislators (blue box), 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.
