House Rules
The other side tried to sneak a deceptive provision into the House Rules on Tuesday, January 3, 2017. The provision would have purportedly limited a Con Con to the amendments initially proposed, which of course is impossible. In other words, the proposed Rules change was a pretentious hoax that would have merely created a false appearance of protection, when there is no way to limit a Con Con (Article V convention).
The great news is that this Rules change failed.
The full text of the House Rules package (H.Res. 5) adopted on January 3, 2017, by the 115th Congress omits this proposed Con Con rule, which was deceptively called the "10th Amendment" rule. The adoption of these House Rules, without the Con Con hoax, was the second order of business after electing the Speaker. Here is what was adopted: 2017 House Rules as adopted.
The proposed "10th Amendment Rule" -- the amendment proposed by Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) as endorsed in Grover Norquist's email -- was not included in the rules package, even though Grover said it was supported by Pete Sessions, chairman of the Rules Committee. Rep. Sessions is from Texas, from where much of the pressure for a Con Con is coming. Both the governor and lieutenant governor of Texas have built big political war chests and both have been persuaded to support a Con Con, which has already been pre-filed there as the Convention of States legislation.
Section 3(d) of the rules package authorizes the Judiciary Committee to maintain a public list of state applications for an Article V convention, or resolutions rescinding prior applications. This provision was added to the rules package 2 years ago, for the first time. Before then, there was never any central list of applications. Here is the official list of applications and rescissions: [1]
