Menu

Search Results for: vote

HomePage 4

2:9 – Rightful Remedy To Federal Overreach: Article VI

If an Article V constitutional convention is a terrible idea that could decimate the Constitution, how can we rein in the federal government?

The solution to big government is found in Article VI of the Constitution. In essence, it is the Constitution’s enforcement mechanism.

The second clause of Article VI states, in part, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land.”

This section is clear: Congress or any other branch of government cannot do whatever they want. Every federal action must “be made in Pursuance” of the Constitution. This clearly implies that laws not in accordance with the Constitution are null and void.

Those in favor of an overreaching government often refer to this section as the “Supremacy Clause” and claim that it allows the federal government to do whatever it wants.

This idea defies the foundation our Constitution was built upon. Powers delegated within our Constitution to the federal government are few and defined, and they are specified quite clearly. The federal government does not have the power to do whatever it wants.

Article VI also declares that everyone in any level of government, whether federal, state, or local, “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.”

In the face of federal overreach, which government official is faithful to his oath:

the one who gives in to the overreach or the one who resists? Clearly the latter.

So, what does this all mean?

First, state and local governments can (and must) nullify every federal action that violates the Constitution. As Article VI requires, these officials are “bound by” oaths to uphold the Constitution, and doing this includes ensuring that the only enforceable laws are those “made in Pursuance thereof.”

Second, voters must elect candidates who are serious about following their oaths and upholding the Constitution. For far too long, We the People have been complacent and allowed our leaders to totally disregard our founding document.

We must hold them accountable by, One: informing others about what the Constitution says and Two: showing them how their elected officials’ records compare. The John Birch Society and our affiliate magazine, The New American, provide multiple tools and resources to help you do just that.

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

2:6 – Testifying Before Your State Legislature

In order to stop a resolution for Congress to call for a convention under Article V, citizens need to testify at the statehouse.

This is how it is done:

First, know who your state legislators are. This is easily found on JBS.org under the “Take Action” tab. Click on “Contact Elected Officials” and enter your address under the “locate your legislators”, then scroll down to see who your representatives are.

The Society will notify you when your state legislature introduces a new Con-Con resolution, schedules it for a hearing, or schedules for a committee vote or floor vote. Sometimes this happens with less than 48-hour notice. So, if you would like these important and timely alerts, also under “Take Action” click on “Legislative Action Alerts” to sign up.

Some state legislatures even provide electronic notification alerts via email to track a specific resolution, bill number or topic. Look into what your state provides. It’s just one more tool for staying on top of what’s happening in the legislature and when hearings or votes may be scheduled.

When you find out a committee hearing is scheduled for a Con-Con resolution, work with your JBS Coordinator to ensure you sign up properly to testify as well as prepare for your testimony. Some states require you to sign up early, others have you sign up when you show up the day of the hearing. So, when looking into the sign-up process, be sure to find out how much time you will have to speak. Some states don’t have a time cap while other states limit testimonies to no more than 5 minutes.

So, prepare accordingly.  Plan for a full testimony, but have an abridged version ready, just in case the committee chair limits the duration of each testimony.

They will state whether to discuss specific points about a Con-Con or the desired constitutional amendment that the resolution seeks to propose at the convention. You will likely testify along with other JBS members and concerned citizens. It’s best to plan beforehand what everyone will be covering. Your Coordinator is trained to help you, so please take their advice.

Speaking off the cuff can be difficult. We recommend typing your speech out and practice reciting, both your full version and backup abridged version, before showing up. If you need help writing it, again feel free to reach out to your Coordinator. They will be more than happy to help you.

Once your speech is written, ask your Coordinator and fellow Birchers if they will listen to your speech and give you feedback. Practice, practice, practice. You want to be able to wow the crowd with facts about why convening an Article V Convention would be a terrible idea. Most con-con supporters have only ever heard their side of the debate and never considered why they should oppose it.

On the day of the hearing, dress professionally to look your best to address the legislators serving on the committee. If you want to show that you are united with other Constitutionalists desiring to stop a Con-Con, consider wearing a sticker or buttons that says “No Article V Convention” or “No Convention of States/COS.” Whether its buttons or stickers, be sure to order them a few weeks before you testify to ensure they will arrive on time.

You are now equipped to deliver a professional argument.

Thank you for taking the time to learn more about testifying at your statehouse. It’s people like you that will help save and restore our constitutional republic.

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

2:5 – Talking With Your State Legislators

Most Americans have never sat down and had a conversation with their state legislator. This may seem a bit overwhelming, but it’s easier than you think. Here is what you do.

Legislators enjoy meeting with constituents. But if the legislator isn’t available, schedule a meeting with one of their staffers. Staffers usually have more time to meet with you and they have the ear of the legislator to pass on what you want them to know. Since they have influence with your legislator, invest that time to educate them on important issues, such as stopping any pending Con-Con resolution or the need to rescind past ones.

You should never go alone. Invite another JBS member. Did you know that on average each visitor represents 200+ voters?

Because of time constraints and budgets, be willing to meet at their district office or a local establishment, or community area. Always be respectful of their preference.

Be prepared to have discussions based on specific legislation and its impact on a Constitutional basis. Approaching them with a political sledgehammer is not an effective solution.

The more you build the working relationship, the more influence you will have on your legislators and their staff.

Now that you have a meeting scheduled, it’s time to make sure you have literature that goes with your discussion points and the current legislative scorecard for the representative you intend to meet with. It’s always good to review their specific legislation based on the Constitution.

Now, if you are unsure of what material goes with your discussion points, go to ShopJBS.org and see what is recommended for that topic. Don’t overdo it by ordering too much and overloading your elected officials. Be selective in what you order. Consider delivering educational materials in smaller doses over time.

Dress appropriately for your meeting. Your first impression will have a lasting impression.

Verify that you are familiar with the issues you will be discussing and with the educational materials you’re giving. A command of the knowledge on the issues will be very impactful in terms of credibility.

Show up on time. Cancelling your meeting or showing up late, can hurt your ability to influence them.

Start the meeting by finding things you have in common.  By the middle of the meeting, ask if you can discuss a specific subject. For example, an Article V Constitutional Convention.

If your elected official agrees, show him or her the educational material and then summarize what it contains.

By the end of your meeting, your State Representative or State Senator will form an opinion on the topic at hand. If they agree with your position, great! If they disagree with your position, consider what discussion points can be brought up at a future meeting. Regardless of their position, they should recognize that you are a respectable citizen in the local community, that they should build a relationship with!

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

1:11 – How Does The Con-Con Effort Connect To Efforts Of The Deep State? 

In a 2017 poll, the Deep State was defined as, “military, intelligence and government officials who try to secretly manipulate government policy.”

There are many individuals and organizations tied to the Deep State that are pushing for an Article V Constitutional Convention. In 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wrote a book titled Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. It praised Marxism repeatedly, and it also called for a national Constitutional Convention. Brzezinski wrote:

“The approaching two-hundredth anniversary of the Declaration of Independence could justify the call for a national constitutional convention to re-examine the nation’s formal institutional framework. Either 1976 or 1989—the two-hundredth anniversary of the Constitution—could serve as a suitable target date for culminating a national dialogue on the relevance of existing arrangements, the workings of the representative process, and the desirability of imitating the various European regionalization reforms and of streamlining the administrative structure.”

Although we didn’t have a Constitutional Convention in either 1976 or 1989, we did come close.

It was Brzezinski’s book that inspired Deep State luminary David Rockefeller, the then-chairman of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations, to create the “Trilateral Commission” in 1973. Their overall goal is to bring together establishment Insiders from North America, Western Europe, and Japan to deepen international “cooperation” and “interdependence,” first among themselves and afterwards with the Communist countries of Europe and Asia, until ultimately, they establish a one world government, which they routine describe as the “New World Order.

Shortly after the publication of Brzezinski’s book and the creation of the Trilateral Commission, another book was published titled The Emerging Constitution. It was written by Rexford G. Tugwell, who was an avowed socialist. He was hired by the Ford Foundation to write a new constitution for America’s 1976 bicentennial.

The new constitution was for the so-called “Newstates of America.” This proposed constitution watered down individual liberties and state sovereignty, expanded the size and scope of the federal government, allowed the president to assume dictatorial powers in the event of a national emergency, and would be ratified by a national referendum.

The constitution for the “Newstates of America” had little support. However, this was also when the push for a constitutional convention under the guise of proposing a balanced budget amendment, or BBA, started taking off. By 1983, there were 32 states with active applications to Congress to call for a constitutional convention, ostensibly to propose a BBA.

One of the key figures to propose a BBA is David Walker, who was the Comptroller General and CEO of the Government Accountability Office from 1998-2008. Walker was also a member of the Trilateral Commission.

In 2018, he co-founded an organization called Let US Vote for a BBA, which is pushing for Congress to call a convention.

The Convention of States organization, also known as COS, is lobbying state legislators to make application to Congress to call a Constitutional Convention, ostensibly to “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 members of Congress.”

One of the members of COS Action’s legal advisory board is Robert P. George. He was also the author of the “Conservative Constitution” a possible “conservative” replacement for the Constitution. George’s “Conservative Constitution” is a disaster for liberty. It guts the Second Amendment and makes onerous federal gun-control laws constitutional. Section 12 of the “Conservative Constitution” says:

Neither the States nor the United States shall make or enforce any law infringing the right to keep and bear arms of the sort ordinarily used for self-defense and recreational purposes, provided that States and the United States in places subject to its general regulatory authority, may enact and enforce reasonable regulations on the bearing of arms, and the keeping of arms by persons determined, with due process, to be dangerous to themselves or others.

Based on this language, who exactly gets to decide what constitutes firearms “ordinarily used for self-defense and recreational purposes”? How would leftist lawmakers and future courts interpret what is meant by “reasonable regulations”? And who will be the one enforcing these “reasonable regulations” on the bearing of arms, and the keeping of arms by “persons determined, with due process, to be dangerous to … others”?

The “Conservative Constitution” was published on the National Constitution Center website in 2020. Two years later, COS co-founder and President Mark Meckler participated in a roundtable discussion organized by Pennsylvania state legislators. While speaking to the state lawmakers, Meckler identified and touted Robert P. George as being on COS’s legal advisory board. Of course, Meckler did not mention George’s “Conservative Constitution” and how it guts the Second Amendment. Nor did Meckler mention the fact that Robert P. George’s name is listed on the Membership Roster of the Council on Foreign Relations!

These are just some of the individuals with Deep State ties who want to convince your state legislature to apply to Congress to call an Article V convention.

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

1:6 – How Would A Constitutional Convention Work? 

A Constitutional Convention is the second, or alternative, method, in Article V, to propose amendments to the Constitution. First, two-thirds of the states have to “make application” to Congress. Once Congress has calculated that enough states, 34 out of 50, have applied, then Congress calls the convention.

The President of the United States does not play any role in calling a convention. Only Congress has the power to determine the time, date, and location for the convention, but also the manner in which the delegates to the convention will be selected and how their votes will be apportioned at the convention.

According to the enumerated powers to Congress, found in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, Clause 18 states:

“[The Congress shall have Power . . .] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

The first two words in Article V are “The Congress.” This means, the power to call a constitutional convention is one of the powers vested to Congress.

Once called, delegates are chosen. Nothing in Article V defines the selection process. Congress could say that the delegates to a convention must be state legislators. They could choose themselves to serve as delegates. Or they could decide that the bulk of the delegates will be chosen by the people through elections in each congressional district.

Once the convention convenes, the actions of the delegates cannot be “muzzled.”

In other words, as a FEDERAL convention tasked with proposing amendments to the FEDERALConstitution, state legislatures have absolutely no power in limiting or controlling the convention. Delegates assembled at an Article V convention represent the People not the states. As the sovereign representatives of “We the People,” they can propose to amend, revise, or rewrite the Constitution.

Only the delegates can:

• choose their own procedural rules of order,

• elect their own convention president and officers,

• draft the text for any new proposed amendments, and

• draft a new constitution.

IFthe delegates restrain themselves to only proposing amendments to the Constitution, then Congress will decide whether the proposed amendments will be ratified by either the legislatures of the three-fourths of the states or by special ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states. The latter would circumvent the legislatures entirely.

IF the delegates choose to replace the Constitution with an entirely new one, the new proposed constitution will be approved by the manner of ratification described within it.

Considering today’s political environment and those representing, “We the People,” is this a risk you are willing to take?

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

1:3 – Critical Document: Articles Of Confederation 

The Articles of Confederation was America’s first Constitution. It defined the limits of the federal government for the United States in the same way that our current Constitution defines the limits of the federal government now. 

Ratified in 1781, the Articles of Confederation was the law of the land until 1789 when our current Constitution was ratified. Fun fact: America’s federal Constitution is the world’s oldest written Constitution that’s still in use today.

In 1787, a Constitutional Convention was convened in Philadelphia at the suggestion of Virginia and 11 other states.  Rhode Island refused to participate or send delegates.  The convention was to be held in Philadelphia with the express purpose of considering amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Those amendments would then be submitted back to all 13 state legislatures for ratification pursuant to Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation.   

However, once the delegates arrived in Philadelphia, it became clear that proposing amendments to the Articles of Confederation would not fix the problems. Since Rhode Island refused to send delegates, and amendments to the Articles of Confederation required approval from all 13 states, it became clear they would also have to change the ratification process.

At the beginning of the 1787 Convention, the delegates voted to conduct the entire process in secrecy. They also voted to set aside all the rules and guidelines. These guidelines, or commissions, were given by both the state legislatures and the Confederation Congress.  From there they proceeded to write out an entirely new constitution, with a more centralized or national form of government, and a new ratification process.

The Articles of Confederation is a critical document when you discuss applying for an Article V Convention today.

First off, there is the legal and historical precedent of how the delegates entered the Philadelphia Convention with the Articles of Confederation, but walked out with the current Constitution. This is critical to understanding how a second convention to propose amendments to the Constitution would likely turn out in the future.  Since the 1787 convention, there hasn’t been another convention to amend the constitution.

There are two very important features of the Articles of Confederation

  1. The Articles of Confederation was to be “perpetual” in nature;
  2. Any amendments to the Articles of Confederation required 100% ratification of the State Legislatures

Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation is where you will find both the “perpetual” language as well as the rules for amending.

“Every State shall abide by the determinations of the united states, in congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this confederation shall be inviolably observed by every state, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them, unless such alteration be agreed to in a congress of the united states, and be afterwards con-firmed by the legislatures of every state.”

The word “perpetual” means forever, everlasting, never-ending, valid for all-time. Perpetual is a very precise legal word with no exceptions.

But when the delegates convened at the convention in Philadelphia, they scrapped the Articles of Confederation, and in turn the existing union. They made significant changes, including how amendments would be proposed and ratified.

The original requirement for any changes to the Articles of Confederation, as we just read, was:

  1. Congress was the only body recognized to make or propose changes,
  2. State Legislatures were the only ratifying body allowed, and
  3. 100% ratification from every state was required for the changes to take effect.

However, in Article V of the new Constitution the delegates changed the way amendments could be made to the new Constitution:

  1. Congress or a Convention called by Congress on the application (of two-thirds) of the states could propose changes,
  2. State Legislatures or special state ratifying conventions could ratify the changes, and
  3. 75% (or three-fourths) of the states is required for the changes to take effect.

However, the new Constitution was not ratified in accordance with then still-legally binding Article XIII of the Articles of Confederation. The new Constitution was ratified by its own mode of ratification, found in Article VII.  

“The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”

This was the most crucial alteration. On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the Constitution and it was subsequently agreed that the new government under the U.S. Constitution would begin on March 4, 1789.

The remaining states that did not ratify were left separate and independent until they eventually acquiesced and ratified it.

Through these actions, the Philadelphia Convention effectively refuted the historical argument for the perpetuity of the Union, as they, along with the ratifying states, effectively dismantled the then-existing Union under the Articles of Confederation.

So, when considering that the delegates were sent to Philadelphia for the “sole and express” purpose of — ONLY — proposing amendments to the Articles of Confederation, what does that mean for any future Convention that is likewise “limited” for the “sole and express purpose of” ONLY proposing a balanced budget amendment, congressional term limits, or reducing the size and scope of the federal government? And whose to say that they could not change the mode of ratification again to 51% of the states or population through a national referendum?

As James Madison noted, “Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first Convention, which assembled under every propitious circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a Second.”  

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org

1:1 – What Is Article V And What Does It Say?  

Article 5 of the Constitution is the part that defines how to make changes or amendments to the constitution.

It defines two methods.

First, amendments can be proposed by Congress. This requires a two thirds majority vote in the house and a two thirds majority vote in the Senate. Then those proposed amendments go out to the states for ratification.

The other method for originating amendments is the Article 5 convention. Article 5 says once 2/3 of the state legislatures have applied for a convention, Congress calls the convention for proposing amendments. Interestingly, the article 5 convention method has never been used.

Either way, once proposed, the amendments move on to ratification. There are also two methods there. Ratification can be done by the state legislatures, or Congress can select special ratification conventions held in each state. Either way, once ¾ of the states have ratified, proposed amendments become part of the Constitution.

Learn more about Article V and the amendment process by visiting JBS.org.

Evaluate Speaker Candidates | Activate America

Candidates campaign and tell you what they will and won’t vote for.  But once they are elected, do you know how they actually voted?  Using TheFreedomIndex.org, you can find out how they voted and see how it matches up to the Constitution.  

Take Action:

1.) Like and Share this video with others.

2.)  Find out how your legislators have been voting at The Freedom Index. 

3.)  Apply for Membership with The John Birch Society and get involved. 

Evaluate Speaker Candidates | Activate America

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Candidates campaign and tell you what they will and won’t vote for.  But once they are elected, do you know how they actually voted?  Using TheFreedomIndex.org, you can find out how they voted and see how it matches up to the Constitution.  

Take Action:

1.) Like and Share this video with others.

2.)  Find out how your legislators have been voting at The Freedom Index. 

3.)  Apply for Membership with The John Birch Society and get involved. 

Close
What are you looking for?