{"id":93124,"date":"2024-02-29T16:40:52","date_gmt":"2024-02-29T22:40:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jbs.org\/?post_type=alert&p=93124"},"modified":"2024-02-29T16:40:56","modified_gmt":"2024-02-29T22:40:56","slug":"oppose-missouri-federal-con-con-resolutions","status":"publish","type":"alert","link":"https:\/\/jbs.org\/alert\/oppose-missouri-federal-con-con-resolutions\/","title":{"rendered":"Stop Missouri Federal Constitutional Convention Resolution HCR 61"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
<\/p><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Members of the Missouri General Assembly are seeking to pass a resolution applying to Congress to \u201ccall a Convention for proposing Amendments,\u201d under Article V<\/a> of the U.S. Constitution, otherwise known as a federal constitutional convention<\/a> (Con-Con) or \u201cconvention of states,\u201d as some erroneously refer to it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n House Concurrent Resolution No. 61 (HCR 61<\/a>) would apply to Congress for a convention to propose an amendment “to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment and remove the power of the federal government to lay and collect taxes on incomes.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n House Bill No. 1442 (HB 1442<\/a>) and Senate Bill No. 1310 (SB 1310<\/a>) also have been introduced. They would ostensibly regulate the conduct of delegates to a convention (titled \u201ccommissioners\u201d in the bills) and are designed to give false assurance that a convention won\u2019t get out of control. Such bills would be completely useless<\/a> at preventing a runaway convention<\/strong> \u2014 for example, they don\u2019t regulate delegates from other states, and don\u2019t prevent delegates from proposing an entirely new constitution (in the 1787 Convention, states also attempted<\/a> to limit delegates\u2019 authority).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although the 16th Amendment certainly should be repealed, an Article V constitutional convention is not a proper or wise way to do it.<\/mark><\/strong> Any Article V convention could lead to a runaway convention<\/a> that would reverse many of the Constitution\u2019s limitations on government power and interference. In other words, a Con-Con could accomplish the same goals<\/a> that many of its advocates claim to be fighting against. <\/strong>As evidence, both a 2016<\/a> and 2023 simulated \u201cConvention of States\u201d<\/a> resulted in amendments massively increasing the federal government and expanding its spending powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When speaking to your legislators, emphasize the following irrefutable facts about an Article V convention for proposing amendments:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia understood<\/a> the danger of a constitutional convention. While he voiced support for one at a 1979 event<\/a>, 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 \u201cthis is not a good century to write a constitution<\/strong>.\u201d Furthermore, what kind of delegates would Missouri send to such a convention?<\/mark><\/span><\/mark><\/em><\/strong> Constitutionalist conservatives or RINO moderates and liberals?<\/mark><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n In 1979, then-U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, correctly warned about an Article V convention:<\/p>\n\n\n\n If we hold a constitutional convention, every group in the country \u2014 majority, minority, middle-of-the-road, left, right, up, down \u2014 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.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Goldwater considered an Article V Convention threatening to the continuity of the United States\u2019 republican form of government. It would be foolhardy and downright reckless to disregard these and other legitimate concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n An Article V convention<\/a> possesses the inherent power to propose\u00a0any<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0changes to the U.S. Constitution, including drafting and proposing an entirely new \u201cmodern\u201d (i.e. socialist) constitution. Instead,\u00a0the Missouri General Assembly should consider\u00a0<\/strong><\/em>Article VI<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0nullify<\/a>\u00a0unconstitutional laws.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, state lawmakers should also consider rescinding any and all previously passed Article V convention applications to Congress, regardless of the desired amendment(s).<\/em><\/strong> Passing rescission resolutions will help prevent aggregating past Article V convention applications with those from other states to force Congress to call a convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Above all, urge your state representative and senator to oppose HCR 61, HB 1442, SB 1310, and all other pro-Article V convention resolutions and to instead consider <\/mark><\/strong>nullification<\/strong><\/a> as a safe and constitutional means to limit government.<\/mark><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n