Hi, any American seeing this, there are now 20+ million Americans (and growing) who are saying Yes to the convention process provided by our high law. Tarred and feathered for decades as if a federal convention is a concept, a toss-up that opens up the Constitution, when it's a process, ultimately resulting in 75%+ approval for ratification (or not).

I'm a Volvo owner and co-founder of national group Friends of the Article V Convention (FOAVC). Any comments/questions, happy to reply.

Congressional Research Service reference: http://www.foavc.org/reference/R44435_20160514.pdf

 

Yes i see

 

Téma Article V Convention je v USA dlouhodobě dost citlivá, protože se pohybuje na hraně interpretace ústavy. Formálně jde o legitimní mechanismus, ale v praxi kolem něj panuje spousta debat o tom, jak by taková konvence probíhala a jak by byla řízena.

Čísla o podpoře a různých iniciativách se často liší podle zdrojů, takže je dobré dívat se na konkrétní legislativní stav jednotlivých států a ne jen na celkové součty. I samotný Congressional Research Service dokument spíš popisuje právní rámec než jednoznačně podporuje nějaký výklad.

Celkově je to téma, kde se míchá ústavní právo, politika i interpretace rizik, takže diskuse f1 casino online bývají hodně rozdělené.

 

Ruby, thank you for the reply. 1) While the issue has been discussed for decades and is widely perceived as having no answers as to how it would proceed, scholarship of the past decade proves this perception erroneous: the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment mandates a federal convention must have all the checks and balances that are placed on Congress in regards to formally proposing amendments. 2) Congressional Records, which are part of the Constitution, show the states have cast over five hundred applications with no terms or conditions, i.e. an application's validity is based on its having been cast. It has become a cottage industry within academia as to their validity and thus helps prevent a convention from taking place. 3) The Congressional Research Service is how members of Congress are taught to see the issue--as if it's some vague concept, rather than a process. 4) In regards to risks, the only risk is the People formally building consensus--the risk is for those perpetuating a status quo which is in effect destroying the rule of law.

This issue, while perceived as an American issue, is actually a global issue because if a peaceable reformation in the USA were to happen it would inevitably lead to a global reformation.

If so moved, please check FOAVC--specifically the links titled 14th Amendment and Illegal Rescissions: foavc.org

Any other thoughts or questions, I'm here.