Full Spectrum Politics

by Robert W. Carter, PhD
DrC@rwcarter.com

and

Ben Wisdom
ben@fullspectrumwisdom.net

Third Draft

March 28, 2010

Executive Summary

1. The United States Constitution allows for its modification. It takes the vote of 2/3 of both houses of Congress to send out an amendment for consideration by the states. In order for any amendment to take effect, 3/4 of the States (38) must vote to ratify it. Each state gets a single vote, therefore the smaller states have as much power as the more populous ones.
2. With enough research (through polling data), it should be possible to predict what potential amendment or amendments have a chance of passage. If several amendments are circulating simultaneously, each stands on its own and must collect 38 ratification votes. Different states will probably support different amendments, but as long as no more than 12 states deny ratification, the amendment will pass.
3. There are three categories of possible amendments to consider: Backlash, Originalist, and Innovative. A healthy balance of these three types of amendments should be combined to form a significant and powerful legal challenge to the worst of the abuses of power occurring in America today.
4. “The Plan” is a three-stage process for exercising the strong Constitutional muscle still maintained by the States. In stage one, support for a suite of potential constitutional amendments will be gauged via the collection of extensive polling data. Importantly, this data will be ordered on a state-by-state basis. In stage two, an Assembly of delegates from each state will meet to choose a set of constitutional amendments that will be proposed. It is the goal that, collectively, these amendments will become the Restoration Bill of Rights. In stage three, the delegates to the Assembly will bring this Plan back to their respective State legislatures, who will in turn petition their congressional representatives to release these Amendments to the states for ratification votes.The Plan to Restore America is going to make a significant impact on the election of 2012.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction to “The Plan for Reawakening America”
2. Review of the Constitutional Amendment Process
3. Description of “The Amendment Application Assembly”
4. Planning of “the Assembly”
5. Non-binding Resolutions
6. Amendment Drafts
7. Rationale for Calling the Assembly
8. Common Objections
9. Endnotes

---

1. Introduction to “The Plan to Restore America”

It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds. – Samuel Adams

The average US citizen feels powerless to correct the many abuses of power they see on a daily basis. Most people, of all political persuasions, are unhappy with the status quo and are uncomfortable with the future course our country seems to be taking.

It is high time for the people of these United States to flex their Constitutional muscles and the Plan to Restore America is a way to do so with powerful results. To Renew America, we need a plan to remove the shackles from the true masters of this Republic (her people) and place them firmly on the ankles of their servants (our elected representatives in Washington, D.C.). The Constitution did this quite well, in the beginning, but in the last century a parasitic political class has developed, and they have wriggled out of the initial set of restraints. In 2008-2009 these elitists finally cast off the last bonds of sanity and responsibility and arrogated unto themselves the power that rightfully belongs only to the people as a whole. Starting In 2010, the people will take their power back.

“The Plan for Reawakening America” consists of several parts:

1. A year-long period of planning, data collection, and publicity. During this planning stage, extensive polling data will be collected to help plot an effective course of action. Potential amendments will be gauged for their level of support among the several States.
2. An “Amendment Application Assembly” (hereafter the “Assembly”). The Assembly will be made up of delegates from each State, meeting to choose a set of Constitutional Amendments they want Congress to send to the States for ratification. These amendments will be weighed carefully for clarity, for “passability”, and for adherence to Constitutional principles. Please note, the Assembly is not a Constitutional Convention as it is only tasked with generating a set of Constitutional Amendments to be sent to Congress for their consideration (more on this later).
3. After the Assembly, several key strategies will be implemented that will help to drive the results to a satisfactory conclusion. These strategies, various options, and potential courses of actions are described below.

There is power in this approach, for there are more “conservative” states than “liberal” ones, even though “liberal” states have a greater share of the population. And, since each state has a single vote in the ratification process, small states have as much power as large ones. With the ever accelerating and radical changes in the balance of power coming from Washington over the past decades, this may be the last chance the smaller States have in exercising their rights as guaranteed under the Constitution. Any proposed Amendment needs the votes of 3/4 of the States (38). Therefore, a 12-state buffer exists for the passage of any Amendment. This is significant, and, according to these lawful rules, states like Kansas have as much say as states like California.

It has been many years since a significant constitutional amendment has been ratified. In 1971, the voting age was universally set to 18 with ratification of the 27th Amendment. In 1992 one of the original 12 proposed amendments that composed the Bill of Rights was ratified after 203 years, almost by default. The last significant attempt at amendment was the Equal Rights Amendment, which expired without ratification in 1979. ¹ Currently, the Fair Tax Amendment is enjoying popularity, but it has not achieved enough support to be sent to the States by Congress.

The Assembly is being called to show how the average citizen can take the reins of a government running wild. We anticipate that the effects of the Assembly will be more significant than the “Contract with America” of the early 1990s for several reasons. First, it is completely grassroots; no elected politician need be involved. Second, it will be a very simple litmus-test campaign issue for the Congressional elections of 2010 and the Congressional and Presidential elections of 2012, regardless of party, at both the Federal and State levels. We anticipate all candidates being forced to field questions like, “Are you for or against the Plan to Restore America?” and, “Are you for or against supporting a dialogue to recover the original intent of the founders of our country?” and, “Which of these Amendments do you support?”

Politicians do not have to support every single idea or amendment in this plan, but they will be forced to let the process proceed and let the people choose the future path of our Country. This way, we will at least get some sympathizing legislators in at all levels and all legislators will have a mandate to allow the Assembly to proceed.

The second phase of “The Plan to Restore America” consists of an Assembly of delegates from each State, meeting to choose a set of Constitutional Amendments they want to propose. We are referring to this set of Amendments as the Restoration Bill of Rights. The delegates of the Assembly will bring this set of Amendments, as drafted and accepted by the Assembly, back to their respective state’s congressional delegation, who will then be asked to propose these on the floor of Congress as Constitutional Amendments.

What Amendments will be proposed? Which Amendments will succeed? That is a matter for Divine Providence to decide. Which ones are possible? That is a matter of discerning the will of the people. How can we bring the federal government back to its duty to preserve, protect and defend the rights of its citizens? Only with sheer, unyielding effort.

2. Review of the Constitutional Amendment Process

Article 5 of the Constitution states how the Constitution may lawfully be amended:

“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”

According to the Constitution, there are two ways to create a new Constitutional Amendment. The first way is for 2/3 vote of both Houses of Congress to vote in favor of sending a new Amendment out for ratification by the States. The second way — the attempt of which has never been successful — is for 2/3 of the State legislatures to call on Congress to declare a Convention for proposing new Amendments (more on this below). Either way, 3/4 of the States must vote to ratify any proposed Amendments.

With enough pressure from the States and the people, Congress will act to send the several proposed Amendments to the States for ratification, after the Amendments are released from committee and upon a 2/3 vote of both houses.

If Congress fails to act, the States technically have the opportunity to act mostly independently of Congress. According to a little known clause in Article 5, Congress must call a Convention for proposing amendments if requested to do so by 2/3 of the States. However, this option is without successful precedent in our history, and no one could predict the development or outcome of such a process.

“If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider itself as having a greater latitude than the Congress…[I]t would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans from both sides…[and] would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts…might have the dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric….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, meeting in the present temper in America.”

– James Madison ²

We would do well to acknowledge the quote from James Madison above. Constitutional Conventions are grave situations, and they should be avoided except as the ultimate last resort. We do not advocate such a last resort, though, if Congress turns a deaf ear to the Assembly, there will be others who might advocate such a drastic measure. In such a situation, our nation would teeter at the brink of radical change. The threat of an impending State-level exercise of this constitutional privilege would hopefully be enough pressure for Congress to then take action. ³

With the rapidity of recent changes, this may be the last chance the smaller States have in exercising their rights as guaranteed under the Constitution. Any proposed Amendment needs the votes of 3/4 of the States (38). Therefore, a 12-state buffer exists for the passage of any Amendment and the various Amendments may pass even if each has a different patchwork of support among the States. There is power in this approach, for there are more “conservative” states than “liberal” ones, even though “liberal” states have a greater share of the population. With each State having a single vote in the ratification process, small States have as much power as large ones.

We are not the first to mention the Article 5 Convention. Just recently, a opinion editorial piece in the Washington Post mentioned this very possibility. ⁴ But, like other commonsense Americans, we hope that such a situation would never have to materialize. Indeed, there remains quite a bit of power in the Constitution. It is not yet time to give up on a national exercise of the basis of our law!

[polldaddy poll=1754517]

3. Description of “The Amendment Application Assembly”

1. Purpose: The Amendment Application Assembly (the “Assembly”) is being called to address certain and specific Constitutional issues by finalizing the wording of a slate of Amendments that are in turn to be submitted to Congress for their consideration. If Congress fails to act, an additional assembly might call on each State legislature to vote on an indivisible application to the U.S. Congress, instructing Congress to call for an Article 5 Convention with the specific purpose of drafting new Amendments and sending these directly to the States for ratification. This second option is undesirable, but with the mood of the country as it is at present, we are probably closer to this than at any other point in our history. The Plan was developed to harness some of the anger and frustration and channel it into a productive, legal, and powerful path for change.
2. Date: Kickoff: the week prior to Sunday, July 4, 2010. Final Assembly: the week prior to July 4, 2012.
3. Location: A sufficiently large convention center in Atlanta, GA (e.g., The World Congress Center)
4. Attendees: Representatives from the several States (as appointed by the legislatures of each individual State), dignitaries, and guests.
5. Access: Only those representatives designated by each of the several States shall have access to the voting floor. There will be a gallery reserved for guests, VIPs, representatives from U.S. territories (Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.) and the press. Other interested parties will be able to watch the proceedings on closed-circuit television outside the Assembly hall or via live streaming on the Internet.
6. Voting Privileges: Only those representatives from the several States shall have voting privileges on any resolution, Amendment, or procedural vote in the Assembly.
7. Procedures: All deliberation shall be according to proper Parliamentary procedure, specifically following Robert’s Rules of Order.
8. Organizing Committee (OC): An OC will be established in the months leading up to the Assembly. The first order of business for the OC at the opening of the Assembly will be to guide the election of officers. Nominations will be taken from the floor. OC members may be elected as officers.
9. Officers: The officers of the OC and the Assembly shall be as follows: President, Vice President, Treasurer, Parliamentarian, and Committee Chairmen.
10. Committees: A separate Committee will be formed for each Amendment and Resolution proposed. Committees shall be chaired by a person with significant life experiences and/or expertise relative to the subject of the amendment. ⁵

4. Planning of “the Assembly”

1. Exploratory Committee: An initial Exploratory Committee will be set up begin the process of organizing this event. This committee will be composed of a small number of people and will be commissioned with the task of developing contacts and creating initial interest in the idea for the Assembly. They will build the Organizing Committee (see section 3.2.)
2. Organizing Committee: This group will be responsible for the planning and execution of the main event. Various responsibilities will include facilities management, maintaining the website, gathering and interpreting data, building a list of invitees, and handling various legal aspects. For the time being, responsibilities and titles will be determined as needs develop.
3. Intellectual Property Development:
   1. Articles of Incorporation: The Assembly will be convened under the auspices of a 501c(3) corporation, or other legal entity as required by law.
   2. Website: The development of a web presence will be one of the first steps to be taken and must be done by a professional company with significant experience in several important areas (search engine optimization and ranking, data handling, mass mailing, polling, on-line financial transactions, etc.).
   3. All materials generated by the Organizing Committee and the Assembly will be copyrighted by the incorporated entity (section 3.3.1.). Final drafts of all documents, Resolutions, Amendments, and summaries will be available according to fair usage standards. Polling data (section 3.4.) will not be made public except for summary statistics. Mailing lists will be maintained for in-house use only.
4. Canvassing and Polling: To better guide the ultimate goals of the Assembly, initial data must be collected. This data will be collected via polling within the several States and through the website. Information is needed on the degree of support for various types of Amendments in each jurisdiction.
5. Invitations: Invitations will be sent to the leadership of each State legislature. A set number of representatives from each State will be invited, but the persons attending will be at the discretion of the initial invitees.
6. Finances and Fundraising: This will be a significant part of the Assembly process, but details are still to be determined, pending the advice of legal counsel.

5. Non-binding Resolutions

1. As the convening of this Assembly may lead to considerable controversy, be it resolved that we, the organizers of said Assembly believe it is of great importance to clarify our position on several potentially inflammatory issues.
2. Non-binding resolutions shall be allowed to be submitted to the joint body for deliberation. All non-binding resolutions must come through one of the several Assembly committees described in section 1.10 after being properly proposed and seconded and after being carefully drafted in committee.
3. Short list: A list of suggested non-binding resolutions for consideration prior to the convocation of this assembly is as follows:
   1. Repudiation of the Former State of Slavery and Lingering Racism and an affirmation of the equal status of all US citizens under the law. We feel this is necessary in today’s cultural environment and with the state of the media today.
   2. Affirmation of Basic Rights of all US citizens, including the right to life, liberty, property, and the franchise (the right to vote).
   3. Affirmation of the Constitutional Rights Reserved to the Individual States to pass Constitutional amendments against the wishes of the United States Congress, President, or Supreme Court.
   4. Affirmation of the Process by Which Constitutional Amendments are to be Ratified, including a statement about the constitutionality of the Titles of Nobility Amendment ⁶ and New Jersey’s rescinding of its ratification of the 14th Amendment. ⁷

6. Amendment Drafts

What follows is a list of suggested amendments to be included in the deliberations of the Assembly. ⁸ This is not an exhaustive list and is meant to stimulate discussion only. Nevertheless, we believe that whatever new restraints this list ultimately contains, the ideas ought to be collected into three categories (listed here in order of decreasing urgency and importance) : Backlash, Originalist, and Innovative. These categories organize and prioritize what must to be done to renew the principles in our country’s charter in a way that people with common sense can rally around regardless of their individual political opinions.

Backlash Amendments

The first and most urgent type of amendments are those which are in direct response to the egregious invasions which have been most recently foisted upon the American body politic. These amendments are designed to harness the recoil of the populace from recent and violent abuses of their liberties in order to prevent these abuses of power from happening again. The 21st and 22nd Amendments of 1933 and 1951, respectively, are excellent examples of this type of amendment. The 21st Amendment repealed Prohibition (instituted under the 18th Amendment in 1919) and was the result of a grassroots effort: Congress proposed it in response to popular outcry and it is the only amendment ratified by State conventions (a successful end run around the perceived influence of special-interest groups on the state legislatures). The 22nd Amendment set an absolute two-term limit for any President. This amendment was the result of the recommendations of the Hoover Commission, established by President Harry S. Truman in 1947 as a response to former President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s seeming stranglehold on the presidency. ⁹ The ideas for Backlash amendments that we have collected to date are as follows:

1. Anti-Congressional Escape Clause Amendment: This would prevent Congress from making any law that does not directly and equally apply to its own members as to the general citizenry. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
2. Federal Spending Cap Amendment: This would restrict Federal spending to exactly that amount raised in the previous fiscal year. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
3. The Brevity of Legislation Amendment: This would limit all Federal bills to a maximum number of words, (e.g., 2,000). ¹⁰). [Comment? Question? Click here.]
4. The Truth-in Legislation Amendment: As suggested by Denning and Smith (1999) and modeled after several State laws, this Amendment would be worded something like, “Congress shall pass no bill, and no bill shall become law which embraces more than one subject, that subject being clearly expressed in the title.” ¹¹ [Comment? Question? Click here.]
5. Anti-Fascism Amendment: This would prevent Federal government ownership of, or interest in, any business entity. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
6. Congressional Recall Amendment: This would give the States the ability to recall the entire Congress with a 2/3 vote of the respective State legislatures and would allow individual States to recall their representation at will. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
7. The Scientific Freedom Amendment: This is designed to protect individuals in scientific fields from the tyranny of the majority. (This amendment idea was originally in the “innovative” category, but we think that recent political events in the scientific and medical realms has made it sufficiently urgent to be moved to the “Backlash” category) It would protect doctors who wish to treat their patients as they deem fit and necessary without any fear of the government telling them how they can or cannot practice their vocation, scientists who don’t subscribe to mainstream scientific theories, even engineers who want to make a living developing better technologies without them being outlawed (a potential with fossil fuels). Suggested wording is as follows:
   

   “Congress shall make no law respecting an absolute establishment of any scientific theory, prohibiting the free inquiry therein; or abridging the freedom of technological innovation; or the right of the people practically to apply the natural sciences to preserve and enhance human life.”

   [Comment? Question? Click here.]

8. No International Law Amendment: The intent of this Amendment is to repudiate the use of international law in deciding US law and policy, and also ensure that no International treaty would ever abrogate the sovereignty of the United States or the independence of her people as protected in the U.S. Constitution. [Comment? Question? Click here.]

Originalist Amendments

The next set of amendments, second in both urgency and importance, would roll back the worst encroachments on our charter document that occurred in the 19th and 20th Centuries. These amendments seek to restore the original intent of the Founders. The 21st Amendment (discussed above) is a good example of the originalist type of amendment, as it repealed one of the more egregious “Progressive” infringements on individual liberty. Any good number of this type of amendment may be needed to restore sanity to the Federal government. Here is the list of Originalist Amendments collected to date:

1. The Originality Amendment: The intent of this Amendment is to decry and obviate the idea of a “living Constitution”. Our founding document is to be read as understood by the original writers, to the best of our ability. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
2. Clarification of States Rights Amendment: This seems necessary to head off future clashes between State and Federal governments on 10th Amendment issues. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
3. Repeal the 16th Amendment: This would end the Income Tax. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
4. Repeal the 17th Amendment: This would return the election of Senators to the State Assemblies. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
5. Sound Money Amendment: This would bring coinage back under the direct control of Congress, repealing the Federal Reserve Act, eliminating the Federal Reserve System in its entirety, and returning the country to a fixed standard for value (gold and silver). [Comment? Question? Click here.]
6. Optional SS and Medicare Amendment: This would make all national entitlement programs that involve collection of money from the citizens, such as Social Security and Medicaid, voluntary. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
7. Anti-Income Redistribution Amendment: This would define and prohibit “income redistribution”, make all Federal expenditures subject to apportionment among the States relative to population, and mandate that all Federal expenditures directly accord with the specific powers granted to the Federal government under the Constitution. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
8. An Explicit and Separate Freedom of Religion Amendment: Religious expression is part of American life. Suggested wording may run something like the following: “Congress shall make no law infringing an individual’s right to worship deity, an individual’s right to maintain a belief in the sacred, or an individual’s right to hold axioms as self-evident.” [Comment? Question? Click here.]
9. End the Automatic Granting of Citizenship to Anchor Babies Amendment: It is not a constitutionally-guaranteed right that children born to persons illegally within our borders are guaranteed citizenship. This point needs clarification. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
10. Clarification of Individual Rights Amendment: This clarifies that all rights outlined by the original Bill of Rights are individual, not corporate, including First and Second Amendment rights. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
11. Localization of Rights Amendment: This would clarify that individual rights start at home (privacy, property, money) and extend outward from there to the Town, State, and Federal levels, in decreasing order of importance. [Comment? Question? Click here.]

Innovative Amendments

The third type of amendment, least in both importance and urgency, are those which address issues that our Founding Fathers perhaps did not foresee. These amendments are suggested mainly to attempt to correct a downward drift in our collective cultural health. These tend to be somewhat innovative relative to the “original intent” of our founders, but are considered by some to be necessary to help repair the erosion of the pillars of our culture.

1. Parental and Family Rights Amendment: This would outline the duties and rights of parents and perhaps hold back international pressures to conform to other standards. See parentalrights.org for more information. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
2. Federal Revenue Limitation Amendment: This is designed to restrict Federal revenue generation to a specific percentage of GDP, to a specific maximum percentage of individual incomes, or to another set amount such as some multiplier of the aggregate of revenue collected by all the States. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
3. Right to Life Amendment: This would outlaw elective abortion. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
4. Marriage Amendment: This would establish the definition of marriage in the Constitution. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
5. State Support of Congressional Salaries Amendment: This would make the States directly fund their Congressional representatives, including salary and benefits, travel allowances, office staff salaries and benefits, and retirement planning. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
6. Balanced Budget Amendment: This would force the Federal Government to operate within specific fiscal limits, to use industry-acceptable accounting practices among all branches and divisions, and to rank programs according to importance in order to implement spending triage decisions. This Amendment would make off-budget items illegal and prevent the further indebting of America through sending money overseas in the form of international aid unless money is available for such a purpose. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
7. Anti-Gerrymandering Amendment: This would force the State and Federal governments to use a new procedure for generating voting districts that produces more regular, geometrically-shaped districts except where prohibited by geography. [Comment? Question? Click here.]
8. The Fair Tax Amendment: This is described in full at http://www.fairtax.org. [Comment? Question? Click here.]

Rationale for Calling the Assembly:

1. The Constitution contains language that allows the States to issue Amendments to the Constitution without being subject to any Federal jurisdiction (including the President ¹²). The same fraction of both houses of Congress — two-thirds — are necessary for sending a Constitutional Amendment to the states as for overriding a presidential veto .
2. It takes 3/4 of the State legislatures (38 states) voting in favor to ratify a new constitutional Amendment. Each state has only ONE vote. Thus, the smaller, more conservative states have as much influence as the larger, more liberal ones (Kansas = California).
3. Each bill drafted by this Assembly will stand on its own, in the same way that the individual Amendments that comprised the Bill of Rights were considered separately (initially, only 10 of the 12 proposed Amendments were ratified). Individual States may vote in favor of some but not others. Once ratified, however, the Amendments are binding on all. Alone, any of these Amendments has little chance of passing through Congress 13 and an even smaller chance of surviving the subsequent media onslaught. Together, especially if supported by a significant groundswell of support, more than several of these Amendments have a fair chance of passage.

8. Common Objections

A. “You are just a bunch of (Neocons, Liberals, Anarchists, insert epithet here…) trying to subvert the Constitution.”

We are not trying to subvert the Constitution; we are trying to save it. Those who would subvert the Constitution are those who would ignore its restrictions and seek ways to gain unrestricted power outside of its checks and balances. We are seeking to work within the textual bounds of our country’s charter to amend it according to its own spirit. The Founding Fathers constructed the Constitution to limit and bind the power of the federal government. Over the past 200 years, the Federal government has struggled against its bonds, gradually loosening them over time. We believe that the strong man that is the Federal government is almost free of his bonds. Now is the time to throw new ropes around him and tie them with new knots before he is completely free to have his way with us. If we who are for this Plan are for subverting the Constitution, then the Constitution contains within itself the means of its own subversion and does not deserve to be in force anywhere.

B. “But the whole process could spin out of control!”

We emphatically state that this Plan is not in any way to be construed as a call for a new Constitutional Convention under Article 5. Rather, this is a call for the various States to exercise the first of these options by creating enough political pressure that Congress will release the amendments to the states for ratification votes.

There have been various calls throughout the years for an Article 5 Constitutional Convention (usually referred to as a ConCon, especially by the detractors), including calls for a convention limited in scope, but Congress may or may not agree to limit its scope, and there are fears that a “rogue” convention might develop once one is called. It is true that any “poison” amendments or calls for a radical reshaping of the Constitution coming out of a rogue convention have little chance of passing (because 3/4 of the states must vote to support such changes)[ii], but we do not want to see the opportunity arise in the first place. Since 2/3 of the States are not petitioning Congress for a Constitutional Convention under the auspices of this Plan, it cannot in any way be construed as a ConCon and cannot legally turn into one.

C. “Do you have any idea how difficult this will be to accomplish?”

Yes, we have some idea how hard this initiative will be to implement. Numerical considerations gives one pause. The amendment proposal method used thus far in our history goes through the United States Congress, which has 535 members (100 Senators and 435 Representatives). Two thirds of each house (357 people) must vote to release an amendment for the States to ratify. After that, 38 State legislatures must vote to ratify the proposed amendment. Depending on the requirements for passage with each state, between 2,379 and 3,203 State legislators need to vote in favor of ratification. ¹⁴ Therefore, to change the Constitution, between 2,736 and 3,560 people at both State and Federal levels must vote for ratification. And this calculation assumes that the ratification will not be by popular vote or state convention in any of the states, which is a distinct possibility. ¹⁵

That’s a lot of work and there are a lot of people to convince, but we believe there are two things which will serve to expedite the process. First, a considerable amount of work will be done leading up to it during the data collection and Assembly phases of The Plan. The Amendments will start out in a more finely-tuned state and we will have collected data that will tell us about the chance of success for each. Second, we believe that the popular backlash to the recent federal infringements on our liberties is going to be very strong; its wave could be high enough to carry this initiative of ours over the high wall that bars its success. So yes, it will be hard to do. But we personally would rather “dedicate our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor” to doing what we can to save our Republic from an overbearing government, than to sit idly by and watch our liberties be hollowed out and embrittled to the point of collapse. Are you with us?

Endnotes

- Wikipedia references are used for simplicity and for the fact that they are universally available. Also, being that Wikipedia is slanted to the left, we feel that using it as a reference for a right-leaning document is good policy. If you know of an additional source for any reference, please let us know and we will add it.
- Click on endnote numbers to return to the pertinent part of the article text.

¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

² This quote can be found in any number of places, we took this from Labunski, Richard E. 2006. “James Madison and the Struggle for the Bill of Rights”, page 130 (read it on Google Books). Thank you to N. Kane for pointing it out and adding that it came from a letter by James Madison to G.L. Turberville, November 2, 1788.

³ In Federalist 85, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “By the fifth article of the plan, the Congress will be obliged ‘on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the States [which at present amount to nine], to call a convention for proposing amendments, which shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of the Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof.’ The words of this article are peremptory. The Congress ’shall call a convention.’ Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body. And of consequence, all the declamation about the disinclination to a change vanishes in air. Nor however difficult it may be supposed to unite two thirds or three fourths of the State legislatures, in amendments which may affect local interests, can there be any room to apprehend any such difficulty in a union on points which are merely relative to the general liberty or security of the people. We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”

⁴ “Is health-care reform constitutional?” by Randy E. Barnett, Washington Post, March 21, 2010.

⁵ Something along the lines of the CGIP algorithm developed by Full Spectrum Politics may be used to rank qualified Committee Chairs (see http://fullspectrumpolitics.net/the-algorithms/).

⁶ The Titles of Nobility Amendment was circulating in the years prior to the Civil War and may have been ratified by the proper number of States, assuming that new States admitted to the Union had no say in the ratification of previously outstanding Amendments, as may have been the case with prior Amendments. Although historically this Amendment has not been considered ratified. This situation requires clarification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titles_of_Nobility_Amendment

⁷ The State of New Jersey may have repealed its ratification of the 14th Amendment when it learned that it would lose partial representation in Congress (due to a clause in the Amendment about the ability of persons involved in insurrection [e.g., the Civil War] to hold office). An affirmative vote by this State may have been necessary for ratification. This situation requires clarification. At the least, knowing the history of, and controversies associated with, the Amendment process will help guide the Assembly in its decision making.

⁸ The Amendments listed are color coded according to a full spectrum color scheme: Government = Red, Market = Orange, Religion = Yellow, Nature = Green, Family = Blue, Neighbor = Purple and Self = Gray. This is done as a check to see if the addition of these amendments would maintain the cultural dignity of each of these realms and to ensure the amended Constitution would achieve a balanced society that does not give absolute power of any one realm over another. See http://fullspectrumpolitics.net/principles/ for more information.

⁹ the Wikipedia article on the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. & Notes on the 22nd Amendment at unconstitution.net

⁹ http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bgale/2009/06/29/time-for-a-28th-amendment/

¹⁰ The Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1789-2001, by John R. Vile. p. 461

¹² “…following the ratification of the 11th Amendment…it was argued that the amendment was invalid because the amendment was not passed to the President prior to being passed on to the states. But in Hollingsworth v Virginia (3 USC 378 [1798]), the Court wrote (in a footnote): “The negative of the President applies only to the ordinary cases of legislation: He has nothing to do with the proposition, or adoption, of amendments to the Constitution.” http://www.usconstitution.net/constnotes.html#Article5

¹³ In Federalist 85, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “In opposition to the probability of subsequent amendments, it has been urged that the persons delegated to the administration of the national government will always be disinclined to yield up any portion of the authority of which they were once possessed.”

¹⁴ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_legislatures

¹⁵ The Wikipedia Article entitled “Conventions within the states to ratify an amendment to U.S. Constitution”.