| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| documents:answers:faq [2016/05/09 20:41] – [If the Federal Government Ignores the Current Constitution, Why Would They Adhere to an Amended Constitution?] Oliver Wolcott | documents:answers:faq [2022/01/01 13:00] (current) – Oliver Wolcott |
|---|
| ====== Frequently Asked Questions ====== | ====== Frequently Asked Questions ====== |
| {{tag>Runaway_Convention Ratification Application Congress_role What_Problem Delegates Runaway_Convention }}\\ | {{tag>runawayconvention Ratification Application Congress_role What_Problem Delegates }}\\ |
| [[http://www.conventionofstates.com/frequently_asked_questions|source]] | [[http://www.conventionofstates.com/frequently_asked_questions|source]] |
| ===== Why Do We Want to Call a Convention of States? ===== | ===== Why Do We Want to Call a Convention of States? ===== |
| Yes. The ratification process ensures no amendment will be passed that does not reflect the desires of the American people. In addition to this, there are numerous safeguards against a "runaway convention," all of which can be found in the Handbook. | Yes. The ratification process ensures no amendment will be passed that does not reflect the desires of the American people. In addition to this, there are numerous safeguards against a "runaway convention," all of which can be found in the Handbook. |
| |
| You can also read [[http://conventionofstates.com/succeed|this page, ]]watch [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzMpSdc5jRQ|this video (Dr. Rob Natelson-"Runaway Convention"?), ]]or read page 17 of [[documents:external:articlev-handbook#v_the_myth_of_a_runaway_convention|Prof. Rob Natelson’s handbook here]] [[http://wiki.conventionofstates.com/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=documents:external:articlevhandbook.pdf#page=19|or here,]] or [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/125/attachments/original/1422924991/runaway-response-rev1.pdf?1422924991| here.]] | You can also read [[https://conventionofstates.com/why-it-will-succeed|this page, ]]watch [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzMpSdc5jRQ|this video (Dr. Rob Natelson-"Runaway Convention"?), ]]or read page 17 of [[documents:external:articlev-handbook#v_the_myth_of_a_runaway_convention|Prof. Rob Natelson’s handbook here]] [[http://wiki.conventionofstates.com/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=documents:external:articlevhandbook.pdf#page=19|or here,]] or [[https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conventionofstates/pages/125/attachments/original/1422924991/runaway-response-rev1.pdf?1422924991| here.]] |
| |
| ===== Can an Article V Convention be Limited to a Single Subject? ===== | ===== Can an Article V Convention be Limited to a Single Subject? ===== |
| ===== If the Federal Government Ignores the Current Constitution, Why Would They Adhere to an Amended Constitution? ===== | ===== If the Federal Government Ignores the Current Constitution, Why Would They Adhere to an Amended Constitution? ===== |
| |
| When the Founders wrote the Constitution, they did not anticipate modern-day politicians who take advantage of loopholes and vague phraseology. Even though the federal violation of the Constitution is obvious to all reasonable Americans, Washington pretends otherwise, claiming the Constitution contains broad and flexible language. Amendments at a convention of states will be written with such politicians in mind.([[historicaldocuments:fedpapers:federalist85#i]|(i)]) The language they use for these amendments will be unequivocal. There will be no doubt as to their meaning, no possibility of alternate interpretations, and no way for them to be broken. | When the Founders wrote the Constitution, they did not anticipate modern-day politicians who take advantage of loopholes and vague phraseology. Even though the federal violation of the Constitution is obvious to all reasonable Americans, Washington pretends otherwise, claiming the Constitution contains broad and flexible language. Amendments at a convention of states will be written with such politicians in mind.[[historicaldocuments:fedpapers:federalist49#i|(i)]] The language they use for these amendments will be unequivocal. There will be no doubt as to their meaning, no possibility of alternate interpretations, and no way for them to be broken. |
| |
| In addition to this, it should be noted that the federal government has not violated the amendments passed in recent years. Women's suffrage, for example, has been 100% upheld. | In addition to this, it should be noted that the federal government has not violated the amendments passed in recent years. Women's suffrage, for example, has been 100% upheld. |
