Home / Opinion / Letters to the Editor / A constitutional convention would be ‘national suicide’

A constitutional convention would be ‘national suicide’

“They” keep telling us the Constitution has not grown with the country; that it has not kept up with the times. Others say we need to amend the Constitution to force Congress to obey the Constitution.

They say if we get two thirds of the state Legislatures to call for a Constitutional Convention, Congress must call one, and that can fix things up just dandy for us.

They say we don’t have a thing to worry about, because if the proposed convention were to propose a bad amendment, the states wouldn’t ratify it.

Here we go: Thirty-four states call for a Constitutional Convention precisely and strictly limited to an amendment, say, to balance the federal budget. They even write the amendment in advance, and it is a really good one. Congress reluctantly calls the convention and even passes a law that it must only consider the amendment of which hath been spoken.

Here’s where it gets dicey: You have already seen Leftist Marxist “Liberal” Politically-Correct “Green” judges approved by the Senate. The same political force could choose the delegates to the convention. They would do what they have done to us all along. The cure would be worse than the disease.

Then, having started the process, they would stick in their pre-written amendments to change the entire Constitution to suit themselves. Nothing could stop a Constitutional Convention from doing anything it might choose. If they chose, they could write a whole new Constitution and scrap the old one.

Then, they specify that the states are to ratify by conventions instead of by state Legislatures. The state conventions are picked and packed the same way and in a matter of days the present Constitution is a footnote for future history books. Behold! The new Constitution is a straight blueprint for total power to Washington; the states are reduced to mere provinces — and the people are reduced to slavery.

Since they are getting all sorts of people to beat the drums for a Constitutional Convention, you can bet that they have their forces already lined up to pack the federal and state Constitutional Conventions, and every evil scheme for which Washington has long been famous already written to hit us with.

No. A Constitutional Convention isn’t the cure. It’s more like national suicide.

Glenn Jacobs, Eagar



  1. I truly appreciate Mr. Jacobs’ concern for his country, but his entire argument is based on a faulty premise. His claim that Congress chooses the delegates to the convention simply isn’t true. Think about it. Just because one party “calls” a convention, doesn’t it mean it gets to choose the delegates for the other parties. Virginia called the Philadelphia Convention of 1787. Did it get to choose the delegates for Massachusetts? Of course not. Massachusetts did. Each state chooses its own delegates; it doesn’t matter who calls the convention. This is Agency law 101 and basic common sense.

  2. Thank you Mr. Jacobs for your comments. Now, let me please address some of your misconceptions below.

    Hopefully the following paragraphs will address concerns regarding the risks of an Article V convention. Let me respond in detail and give you some of the sites on the COS Project website that you may want to look at for more information.

    The biggest concern expressed by legislators and citizens alike about the calling of an “Amendments Convention of States” under Article V of the Constitution is that it will become a “runaway” convention that will somehow try to re-write the Constitution and force upon us a host of changes we don’t want. Let me be clear: THERE IS ZERO CHANCE OF THAT SUCCEEDING. Here’s why.

    First, it is NOT a “constitutional” convention. It is a convention of states acting subject to and within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution convened for the purpose of proposing amendments germane to a specific subject or topic. In the case of the convention of states, the purpose is to “impose fiscal restraints on the federal government [e.g., a balanced budget], limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government [e.g., respect the 10th Amendment], and limit the terms of office for its officials.” Any effort to convert such a convention to something beyond that would be illegal and stricken down by the courts. Any proposal outside the purpose of the call would be killed by Congress or the courts or the states as discussed below.

    Second, since it is a convention of states, the states control everything that happens. Thus, each state (legislators) appoints its delegates to attend and therefore can send delegates who will follow the instructions of the state. If they don’t, the states can recall the delegate’s mid-convention and send new ones who will stay on task.

    Third, it is both politically and practically impossible for a convention to act outside its call. We live in a diverse country. Presently, there are approximately 20 right leaning states, 15 left leaning and 15 swing states. The magic number is 13! 13 states is all we need to stop the run-a-way convention and stop their so-called delegates from adversely affecting what will and should be in play. The likelihood that one philosophy could as a practical matter impose itself on the convention is slim. We know this to be a fact by simply looking at all the deliberative bodies in the 50 state legislatures. Even in the most tilted states, rarely does such imposition of will occur. There were 33 such conventions of states and colonies called prior to 1787; none usurped their power. The states have internally held such amendments conventions 233 times; none has usurped its authority. History and the intense public scrutiny on such a convention would guaranty that it assuredly won’t happen in a high profile convention of states with diverse delegations from all over.

    Fourth, the product of such a convention would be nothing more than a series of amendment “proposals” that would then have to be submitted to the states for ratification. Article V provides that Congress must determine the method by which any such proposed amendments would be ratified, either by the state legislatures or by a called convention in each state. If the proposed amendment went beyond the scope of the call of the convention, Congress would be within its authority not to submit it to the states for ratification.

    Fifth, none of the convention’s proposals, even if submitted to the states by Congress, would become law UNLESS they were ratified by THREE-FOURTHS (75%) of the states. That’s 38 states. So, based upon the breakdown of our present state political leanings, any worrisome, left-leaning proposal would have to be adopted by ALL of the states that lean left, by ALL of the swing states, and BY AT LEAST EIGHT of the conservative states, in order to become law. Any right leaning proposal would have to garner support from three of the left leaning states. The three-fourths ratification requirement is the ultimate check and balance on the actions of an amendments convention and would politically drive such a convention to propose reasonable, common sense, bi-partisan amendments. Otherwise, any proposal will be rejected.

    Sixth and finally, because we have never held such a convention and because the niceties of such a process have never been directly addressed in our legal system, any overreaching by a convention of states would surely be opposed at multiple steps along the way and challenged in our federal courts, thus further diminishing any possibility of “runaway” convention. The legal scholars largely agree that any reviewing court would, prior to ratification, disqualify and overturn any amendment adopted outside of the authority of the convention call.

    In short, THERE IS A ZERO CHANCE that a general convention of states could evolve into a runaway convention that could wreck havoc on our Constitution and virtually all legal scholars from across the political spectrum now agree on this point.

    Thus, the question before us is: Are we more threatened by the mythical chance of a runaway Article V convention or by the reality of a runaway federal government?

    For more information on this subject and the Convention of States Project, take a look at these sites:

    FAQ’s: http://www.conventionofstates.com/sites/default/files/COS%20FAQs%20handout.pdf

    The COS Project Overview: http://www.conventionofstates.com/sites/default/files/COS%20Overview%20handout.pdf

    How to sign up: http://www.conventionofstates.com/leadership-positions

    I hope you will get on board at the ground level for this important project. Arizona was the forty-eighth state to adopt the U.S. Constitution. It needs to be the first state to adopt the resolution that saves it!


    Linda Brickman,
    Arizona Legislative Liaison Director
    Convention of States Project
    602-330-9422 – cell

  3. Mr. Jacobs you are confused!! We are talking about “Convention of states” not constitutional!!!!

  4. I think the founding fathers, who clearly held state powers dear, and wrote Article 5, would disagree with Mr. Jacobs. The considered the states’ independent ability to call for a convention a check on federal power.

  5. Mr. Jacobs – you are wrong.
    We are looking for a Convention of States, Article V – so we can put limits on an over reaching federal government, judges, taxes & elected officials oh yeah & a forced open border policy being forced on us.

    It IS the fail-safe that was built into the Constitution for just this reason: Federal elected officials STOPPED listening to their electorate long ago; Judges are legislating from the bench; EPA, IRS FEDS have completely abused power that was given to them BY US, the people!

    1. I suggest adding amendments that would abolish life-time appointments of Judges, caps & a check & balance on them.
    (its also been suggested that we add 50 Justices to the Supreme Court… instead of just appointment by a corrupt president.)

    2. FEDERAL taxes allowed on Corporations, Individuals, Small Business to a mere 18% of an income –
    THE REST OF TAXES SHOULD BE REQUESTED & GENERATED & KEPT IN THE STATE! (That’ll put an end to cronyism & political payback at Federal level)

    3. TERM LIMITS! No more should a 35yr congressperson or senator exist; they’re children/ grandchildren/ cousins become lobbyists (for generations) on K street.
    NGO’s (IE groups like Sierra Club, bike coalitions & ICLEI) have more influence over our government than we the people!)

    4. We have to stick something in their to address the open borders/amnesty situation going on w/ elected officials. (we have to take the ball out of the politicians’ hands!)

    That’s all I can think of right now… but BELIEVE ME a Convention of States is the ONLY way out of becoming like every other country in the world. That’s what liberals want! Is that who YOU are Mr. Jacobs?

  6. How often can one commit suicide? Once. And this nation has already committed suicide. The Constitution is already extinct. Until we are honest about that and face up to it, we will not find a solution. This nation committed suicide when it erased our southern border, elected Barack Obama, and passed Obamacare into law. Nothing a Constitutional Convention could do would make things any worse. The USA is beyond reform and needs to be replaced, preferably by peaceful means. But our national leaders are not going to improve things. They are the problem. Well… actually they are not the problem. The voters who elected them are the problem.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *




Check Also


What the state is doing to help further victims’ rights

As one of Arizona’s largest funders of victims’ services each year, ACJC places great focus on seeking legislative changes that advocate for victims’ rights, provide additional resources, and improves accessibility to victims’ services and programs.