I first became involved with the Convention of States Project in early 2014 after reading The Liberty Amendments written by Mark Levin. I believed that getting the COS Article V resolution passed through a majority-Republican legislature (as Pennsylvania has) should not be that difficult.
The resolution is nothing more than a request for a meeting to discuss and potentially propose topic-limited amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The resolution is not a law; it does not involve taxes or spending in any way; it does not require action by the governor; and it is intended to restore federalism and the separation of powers between the federal government and the states as originally contemplated when the Constitution was written and ratified.
Importantly, a convention call for the COS topics also could result in the restoration of significant policy-making power and funding responsibilities to the state legislatures, which is something state legislators should really like.
In addition, two Article V convention resolutions were passed by the General Assembly in the late 1970s: one for a balanced budget amendment and the other for a right-to-life amendment. Both of resolutions are still in effect.
So, after 7+ years of activism and support by thousands of Pennsylvanians, why hasn’t the resolution passed?
Well, many members of the General Assembly are afraid to use Article V For example, one of our PA COS supporters recently received several emails from his Republican House member in response to a request to the member to support the COS resolution (HR 109). Below is the text of the emails.
June 11 (first message)
Actually these convention of states resolutions are very dangerous. Many conservatives such as myself have real concerns with them. We'll see how it unfolds but we can end up a socialist country and have a convention of states where our constitution is totally thrown out. Our Second Amendment groups are very much against these bills.
June 11 (second message)
We had a very spirited caucus last Session concerning this. And there was quite a bit of disagreement because there is uncertainty if we can keep the focus on just these issues if there is a constitutional convention. I don’t think anyone who has conservative values has an issue with the concepts behind these several resolutions.
The problem is and the question….can we end up with a bigger mess than what we have now? We have one group of conservatives who thinks the constitution could end up getting shredded and another group who promises that that would never happen.
For me, it does stink that I’ve taken a pretty big hit with one Second Amendment group because of my support for [a different Article V] resolution.
I just received an email from a hard-core conservative constituent just a few days ago who was frustrated that I was a cosponsor on that one. He actually wrote our forefathers were smart enough to keep the constitution the way it was and we don’t need to have another convention.
I just want to give you a heads up that these need to be looked at pretty carefully and the lawyers better know what they’re doing.
June 15 (third message)
Thanks Tom. I am sitting tight for now with what I have done. I am willing to listen to my colleagues and see how it unfolds with our Leadership. Obviously, it has to be caucused by the GOP House if and when it may move forward.
As an FYI, there are many bills and resolutions I support and vote affirmatively that I don't co-sponsor. In my mind, co-sponsoring these are actually moot, since I am willing to listen since I agree with the concepts within it. My instincts, as of now, are to sit tight. I am not a "hell no" like some Republicans and assume most Democrats would be.
Although there is much to dispute in these comments, I appreciate the honesty and candor. I’ve seen/heard similar statements from numerous legislators. There are many members of the General Assembly who have not done their homework related to an Article V convention and have accepted a version of what the Constitution means that is not based on fact and original intent.
At a minimum, whenever they hear the “runaway convention/constitutional convention” claims, they should be asking for the opponent to explain exactly what these words in Article V mean: “…a Convention for proposing Amendments…as Part of this Constitution.” In some (probably most) cases, legislator opposition to an Article V convention is based on the fear of losing a re-election campaign, not on the merits of the opposition arguments.
I consider opposition to an Article V convention application from a process perspective to be a betrayal of the legislator’s oath of office. They all committed to protect and defend the entire Constitution, not just selected portions of it. It is their duty to understand what every word in Article V means, and then act accordingly to affirm it. Even worse, last year many members of the General Assembly also refused to protect and defend Articles 1 and II of the US Constitution with respect to state legislature responsibilities concerning the conduct of federal elections. Obviously, this is unacceptable, but unfortunately not surprising.
So now what?
Andrew Breitbart observed that “Politics are downstream of culture.” Consequently, I’ve come to the conclusion that the failure to get the resolution passed in PA is not a political problem; it’s a cultural problem. The General Assembly we have is not populated, for the most part, by people who understand that, before anything else, their job is to fiercely protect and defend the U.S. (and PA) Constitutions and to protect us from federal government tyranny in all forms. This is not just a PA problem; it exists across the country. And it’s our fault. We’re the ones who elected these representatives and senators.
The real question is: where do the citizens of PA stand? Are a majority of us truly freedom- and liberty-minded? To what extent do we as a state population actively, loudly, and peacefully resist tyranny in government at all levels? Are we that different from the people in the 15 states that have passed the COS resolution (Georgia, Alaska, Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, Indiana, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas, Utah, and Mississippi)?
If we want a state government that stands for the U.S. and PA Constitutions and does everything possible to end federal tyranny, we’re going to need to put different people in the seats. Next year is an election year for all state representatives and half of the state senators. We all need to begin to review the record relative to actions taken/should be taken by our representative and senator (if applicable for the 2022 elections) and see where they stand on Article V, and where they stand on Articles I and II concerning the 2020 election. If their record is not satisfactory, then we need to do all we can to see that primary challengers are in place for the primary election next year, including running for office ourselves, if necessary.
I’ll provide more information on the record periodically, but here’s a start. Listed below are the representatives and senators who are currently co-sponsors of the COS resolution for this session:
Senate: Dush (prime sponsor), Phillips-Hill (prime sponsor), Argall, Martin, DiSanto, Pittman and Mastriano
House: Keefer (prime sponsor), Armanini, Burns (D), Davanzo, Gillen, Hamm, Jones, Kauffman, M Mackenzie, R Mackenzie, Mercuri, Moul, Mustello, Pennycuick, Rothman, Ryan, Smith, Stambaugh, Warner, Zimmerman and Delrosso.
There are others who support the resolution. For example, Reps Borowicz, Dowling, Dush, Miller and Staats voted for the resolution in committee in 2019 even though they were not co-sponsors at the time. So did committee members Reps Grove, Knowles, Schmitt and Wheeland, who were co-sponsors last session but are not yet co-sponsors this session. Any member can still sign up to be a co-sponsor, and several more members in both chambers may do so. I’ll let you know (by district) if/when that happens. If your representative and/or senator are not COS resolution co-sponsors, you should ask them why.
The Pennsylvania COS resolution passage effort has been an unexpectedly difficult struggle so far. But we need to stay in the fight. The survival of the republic and the future of our children and grandchildren is at stake.
