Dear editor:

Article V of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that there are two methods for proposing constitutional amendments: either Congress may do so, or else a Convention of States may do so. Some local groups are spreading misinformation that requires a rebuttal.

An Article V Convention of States is never referred to as a “Constitutional Convention” or a “Con-Con” except by its detractors, who disingenuously insinuate that the process is a confidence trick by those who wish harm on the United States and its people.

The John Birch Society’s regional director actually told me that Article V is unconstitutional.  While understanding the anxiety of some citizens because they simply do not trust anyone whomsoever to do anything whatsoever to the founding document, it is surely an absurdity to claim the Constitution is unconstitutional. 

Here is a claim by Wyoming Campaign for Liberty: “Our Founding Fathers never intended the use of an Article V Constitutional Convention (sic) to rein in unconstitutional behavior of elected officials! Rather, their intended use of this mechanism was to address errors within the text of the Constitution.” The wording neither says nor implies any such thing. It merely stipulates that either Congress or a Convention of States shall undertake the same action as each other. Congress has already proposed a number of amendments that have been ratified by at least three-fourths of the states and thus been added to the Constitution. The same high bar would be applied to any that are successfully proposed by an Article V Convention.

Wyoming Campaign for Liberty further asserts: “An Article V Convention is a federal convention, called by the federal government to amend the federal Constitution." This is incorrect. In fact, Congress’s role is limited to issuing the “call” which sets the date, time, and location of the meeting once it receives applications from two-thirds, or 34, states for the same purpose. Congress and anyone else inside Washington, D.C., has no control over the delegates — who are selected by the states themselves — or the debate, or the outcome.

These objections, though well-meaning, have no validity. Congress will never act on the three concerns currently under discussion: term limits for Congress and federal appointees, the staggering national debt, and federal overreach. The time for the states and the people to assert their rightful authority has never been more clear.

Sheila Leach

Cody