This website uses cookies to improve your experience.

Please enable cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website

Sign the petition

to call for a

Convention of States!

signatures

Outstanding Executive Committee session!

Published in Blog on February 03, 2023 by Carol Petrusewicz

Today's session was full of positive surprises!

Co-Sponsor Rep  Brandon Phinney is on the committee and starts by making a motion of OTP (Ought To Pass).  

 

 

All that we have heard in the last few weeks of Article V what it does and what it does not, I think we can safely assume that all the safeguards in place, the amount of states that would have to ratify an amendment, that all the myths and the mongering on fear on what a convention would or would not do is false.
 
I think that we are at the point, politically and socially, where we need systemic changes in the way our federal government functions, and the founders incorporated that in our constitution. It is the safest most non-violent way to do this. We need to reign in the power of congress and flip the power dynamic back to the States over the federal government so that we can assert our sovereignty and protect our future.
 
I think it is the best way to do it. This committee has a history of not passing these bills based on the information from the other side that would say that this would harm our process, or our functionality and I just don’t see how that’s possible.  All the information that we got from the experts overwhelmingly states that this is the best way to achieve what we’re trying to do as a country.  It’s got to start somewhere, so it should start with us.

Seconding the motion is Committee Member Rep Linda Massimilla.

The forefathers were wise enough to realize that when men come into power and are authoritative. Sometimes that power can be misused, and then what are we left with?  We are left with the people trying to make a decision about what to do.

I think they were wise enough to  put that as in article. I think that we should respect that.

Opponent Committee Member Rep Steven Shurtleff adds:

I am opposed to the bill and will be voting no. I thank the sponsors for bringing it in and the information they gave us all in good faith, but in my heart of hearts, I just cannot support a constitutional convention. I still have concerns about issues being brought up and for that reason I will be voting no.

 

Co-Sponsor Phinney was quick in responding, clarifying the Resolution.

To clarify, what we’re voting on is not a constitutional convention, it’s an Article V convention.  They are two separate things. A constitutional convention is to create a new constitution. Article V is just to propose amendments, which is what our right is to do.

 

Subbing for Rep Jean Jeudy, Marjorie Smith shared her opposition.

Another point, it’s been a long time since I have been in the classroom as a student, but not a long time since I’ve seen I’ve studied the Constitution and things relating to it. Perhaps I am wrong, but I remember very clearly that when the Articles of Confederation were not working the way the people wanted them to work, they asked for an opportunity to amend the Articles of Confederation.  What they did to eventually end up creating the Constitution to which all of us in this room have tended to varying degrees to pledge our allegiance
 
I do not believe that the country is perfect. I don’t believe that the Constitution is perfect but for several hundred years we have limped along trying to make it better and better. I would hope that we would not do anything that might interfere with that constancy as we have worked together to form a more perfect union. So, I plan to vote against the motion.

Rep Larry Gagne added his conclusions.

I am a high school graduate. I am not a lawyer, doctor or anything. The things I did, I did with my fists.  I was a martial arts instructor back in the day.
 
Now, this is my eighth term.  All the previous terms I voted, “no,” to an Article V.  I was not that informed. This time out, because I am on this committee, something came out about this, and believe it or not, this high school guys read the whole thing.  I found out, that you know the people have got to have a voice in what goes on in our government because it’s for us, not for them, it’s for us.
 
So, I am going to be wholeheartedly voting for this Article V convention.
 

Rep Tom Mannion shared a different perspective.

Along those same lines, I’ve always been a proponent of Article V mechanism to keep the federal government in check.  It’s been the sole body to propose and have amendments passed. The states have that power. It was put there for a reason, because there are things that Congress itself will not propose to fix itself. So, it must be up to the States to do so, and this is what this is for.

Chair Moffett explained his rationale.

I am like Rep Gagne in that this is not a measure I supported in the past. It came to this committee last term and I want to say was on consent. There was not much energy or interest in it last term.  But that was last term. And I must say that like Rep Gagne, they try to honor the people who came and testified with which we had many many many more this term. I did some reading as Rep Gagne did and I listened. The reason that we were in Reps Hall last week was because of the volume, the great number of people who wanted to weigh in on this measure.
 
One of the things that I concluded is that a lot of the opposition to this measure is largely fear- driven which is not unusual.  With almost any measure that we deal with, the opponents of it will try to stroke fears, because they think this is not the best way to go.  But, if you go back to the Federalist Papers or the Founders, there’s a reason that they had this, that they put this mechanism in place. They put this option, this mechanism in place as an option for us to utilize if necessary.
 
Earlier today, I found it very interesting in the hearing of a different bill that had to do with an amendment to the Constitution, I believe it was the 21st amendment with repeal of prohibition. It was pointed out that the prohibition movement, there was an Article V movement for the prohibition measure. Because of that Article V movement, the traditional way of amending the Constitution came about and we got Article twenty-one, which perhaps would not have happened the same way, if at all, had it not been for the chance for an Article V convention.
 
So, I am going to vote FOR this measure this time around.

Another point I want to make is that I’ve learned that in the past this came out of this committee unanimously in favor of an Article V convention and procedurally, it did not get to the Senate.
 
So, this is interesting history on both sides for this measure in the past.
 
The final thing I want to say is that committees have a lot of power. If something comes out of committee, one way or the other, it matters usually a lot on the house floor. I would like to see this measure move forward so other folks can give it full consideration, which I think is more likely to happen if it comes out of this committee with a favorable recommendation rather than to kill it. Those are my thoughts on it.
 

Rep and Clerk Lorrie Carey was torn. She focused on people instead of the Resolution at hand.

As you know, I like to follow the money, because I believe everything in life goes back to that. We had a speaker who was flown in to speak to us. I did look up their 990s.
$65.9 million dollars in revenue this non profit made. It defines itself as a legal Ministry, Conservative, Christian, curtailing rights for LGBTQ, expanding Christian practices in public Schools and Government and outlawing abortion. That disturbed me. That disturbed me because this was a keynote speaker, and this is what this individual represented. And so while initially, I had no concerns with an Article V convention, I began to be concerned because this is the keynote speaker.
 
So then I pulled the 990s of the organization I believe that has been speaking to us more directly. Mark Meckler would be the head of that organization. I looked up how much he and his wife were making running this organization.  With someone with a degree in nonprofit management, I’m a little disturbed at how much money these people make advocating for this sort of thing.

So I am troubled by following the money. Every action in life goes back to who pulls the strings and who has the money. So this is my concern and this is what I have not settled I my mind.

 

The vote came in.  13-5 Ought To Pass!

WOW!

AMAZING!

Thanking the committee for their diligence in studying the material shows that we value each Rep's time and them as people.  A "thank you" goes a long way.  For anyone willing can also send their "thank you,"  here is the committee's contact information.
 

 

Click here to get involved!
Convention of states action

Are you sure you don't want emailed updates on our progress and local events? We respect your privacy, but we don't want you to feel left out!

Processing...