user Create your account


mail Sign in with email


Failure to Call Amending Conventions Helps Explain Modern Federal Overreaching


In the excerpt below, Prof. Rob Natelson explains how our failure to call a Convention of States has allowed the federal government to expand its power to an alarming level. Read his full article here.

If president after president failed to veto bills, would it surprise you if congressional power grew at the expense of the presidency? If the Senate never blocked the president’s appointments, would it surprise you if presidential power expanded at the expense of Congress? If the courts refused to enforce the Constitution’s ban on ex post facto laws, would it be strange if the states passed more ex post facto laws?

And if the states failed to use the Constitution’s “convention for proposing amendments” -- a device inserted in the document to correct and check federal excesses and abuses -- would it astonish you if there were federal excesses and abuses?

Of course not. Each of the Constitution’s checks is designed to ensure that the system operates in a balanced way while preserving liberty. Disabling any of these checks violates the Founders’ design.

Although presidents often veto bills, senators sometimes block nominations, and the courts enforce the ban on state ex post facto laws, the Article V procedure by which a convention of states bypasses Congress and proposes corrective amendments has never been used to completion. The neglect helps explain the size and dysfunction of the modern federal government.

Read the rest of the article on The American Thinker.