Difference between revisions of "Con Con"
From Phyllis Schlafly Eagles
(→Passed COS) |
|||
| (70 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ''See also [[Top ten reasons to oppose a Con Con]] and [[Convention of States]]''. | |
| − | * Arkansas<ref> | + | The 21 States being targeted by the promoters of a constitutional convention -- a "Con Con" or "Convention of States" -- for 2017 listed below. |
| − | * Arizona | + | :''Our won-loss record as of June 30, 2017: '''18 wins, plus 3 rescissions, and only 4 losses'''. Our victories have been in Arkansas, Idaho (our defeat of another constitutional convention proposal doomed the COS there), Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina (in committee), South Dakota (floor vote), Utah (floor vote), Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming''. Rescissions were by Maryland, Nevada, and New Mexico. Only Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and (with conditions) Missouri have passed Convention of States this year. |
| + | |||
| + | Targeted states: | ||
| + | * Arkansas, SJR 2<ref>https://5newsonline.com/2016/12/30/arkansas-legislators-file-resolutions-for-convention-of-states-to-reign-in-u-s-government/</ref> - DEFEATED COS by a 13-17 vote on Senate floor (1/30/17). | ||
| + | * Arizona - passed House narrowly | ||
* Colorado | * Colorado | ||
| − | * Kansas<ref> | + | * Idaho - SCR108 (BBA) was defeated by a wide margin. HCR018 (COS) was introduced Feb. 23 and is in the Idaho House State Affairs Committee. |
| + | * Kansas<ref>https://www.kvoe.com/newsedit/16785-kansas-convention-of-states-making-push-for-formal-application</ref> - HCR 5005 - House committee rejected it 9-13 on Feb. 15th<ref>https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article132999744.html</ref> - Kansas Constitution requires a 2/3rds super-majority vote for this | ||
* Michigan | * Michigan | ||
* Minnesota | * Minnesota | ||
| − | * Missouri | + | * Missouri - passed House committee on Feb. 14 |
| − | * Montana | + | * Montana - HJ8 (COS) was tabled in its committee - VICTORY! |
| + | * Nebraska - LR6 passed out of committee (only one legislative chamber in Nebraska). | ||
| + | * North Carolina - HJR44 (COS), SJR36 (COS) - referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Operations; rescission bill is HJR52 | ||
| + | * North Dakota - [[North Dakota HCR3006|HCR3006]] (COS), passed in House committee 2/10, on House floor now - but notice that it differs from other COS resolutions; also HCR3008 (WP); Senate passed both SCR4006 (Countermand) and SB2145 (Delegate). | ||
* Ohio<ref>https://limaohio.com/news/223041/amy-eddings-a-more-engaged-citizenry-is-his-new-years-resolution</ref> | * Ohio<ref>https://limaohio.com/news/223041/amy-eddings-a-more-engaged-citizenry-is-his-new-years-resolution</ref> | ||
* South Carolina | * South Carolina | ||
| − | * South Dakota - COS had '''''three''''' paid lobbyists there in 2016 | + | * South Dakota - COS had '''''three''''' paid lobbyists there in 2016 - WE WON IN 28-40 VOTE IN HOUSE ON 2/13/17 |
| − | * [[Texas COS 2017|Texas]] | + | * [[Texas COS 2017|Texas]] - [[Texas SJR 2]] passed the Senate due to Big Money donations behind it in Texas. |
| − | * Utah | + | * Utah - On reconsideration, it was DEFEATED by 12-16-1 in the Senate. |
| − | * Virginia - Convention of States | + | * Virginia - Convention of States lobbied the Legislature on January 16 (called "Lee and Jackson Day" there) - BUT WE WON!!! |
| − | * Wisconsin | + | * Washington - SJM 8003 (COS) heard but failed to pass in senate committee by the Feb. 17th deadline; no hearing for HJM 4006 and 4003 in House before the February 17th cutoff so that are done also. |
| + | * West Virginia - passed the Senate without a mandatory committee hearing, moves to the House. [https://wvpublic.org/post/resolution-urging-convention-states-heads-house#stream/0] | ||
| + | * Wisconsin (bills 800, 1541, 799) | ||
| + | * Wyoming HJ1 (COS) Failed 18-42 (1/30/17) | ||
==Passed COS== | ==Passed COS== | ||
| − | Only | + | Only 15 states have enacted resolutions for a Convention of States, some using language different from others.<ref>Fewer than states have passed identical language, [https://www.sltrib.com/home/3557896-155/committee-oks-push-for-constitutional-convention according to this report].</ref> Each of these states should rescind its call: |
| − | *[[Alaska HJR 22]] - "BE IT RESOLVED that, under art. V, Constitution of the United States, the Alaska State Legislature respectfully '''applies to the United States Congress to call a convention of the states for the '''sole purpose''' of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office''' of federal government officials;" | + | *[[Alaska HJR 22]] (2014) - "BE IT RESOLVED that, under art. V, Constitution of the United States, the Alaska State Legislature respectfully '''applies to the United States Congress to call a convention of the states for the '''sole purpose''' of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office''' of federal government officials;" |
| − | *'''Alabama''' | + | *'''Alabama''' (HJR112, 2015) |
| − | *''' | + | *'''Arizona''' (2017) |
| − | *''' | + | *'''Florida''' (SM476, 2014) |
| − | *[[Indiana SJR 14|'''Indiana''' SJR 14]] - "The legislature of the State of Indiana hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states '''limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints of the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office''' for its officials and for members of Congress." | + | *'''Georgia''' (SR736, 2014) |
| + | |||
| + | *[[Indiana SJR 14|'''Indiana''' SJR 14]] (2016)- "The legislature of the State of Indiana hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states '''limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints of the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office''' for its officials and for members of Congress." | ||
*[[Louisiana HCR 52|'''Louisiana''' HCR 52]] - "THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby memorialize and apply to the United States Congress for the calling of a convention of the states '''limited to proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints upon its activities, and limit the terms of office''' that may be served by its officials and by members of Congress." | *[[Louisiana HCR 52|'''Louisiana''' HCR 52]] - "THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby memorialize and apply to the United States Congress for the calling of a convention of the states '''limited to proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints upon its activities, and limit the terms of office''' that may be served by its officials and by members of Congress." | ||
| − | *''' | + | *'''[https://legiscan.com/MO/text/SCR4/2017 '''Missouri''' SCR4 (2017)] - contains a 5-year sunset provision (this provision was later repealed) |
| − | *[[Tennessee SJR 67|'''Tennessee''' SJR 67]] - "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE ONE HUNDRED NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCURRING, that this legislative body does hereby apply to Congress under the provisions of Article V of the United States Constitution for the calling of a convention of the states, limited to proposing amendments to the United States Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office ...." | + | *'''North Dakota''' (2017) |
| + | |||
| + | *[https://legiscan.com/OK/text/SJR4/2016 '''Oklahoma''' (SJR4 2016)]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[Tennessee SJR 67|'''Tennessee''' SJR 67]] (2016) - "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE ONE HUNDRED NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCURRING, that this legislative body does hereby apply to Congress under the provisions of Article V of the United States Constitution for the calling of a convention of the states, limited to proposing amendments to the United States Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office ...." | ||
| + | |||
| + | *'''Texas''' (2017) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *'''Arkansas''' (2019) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *'''Utah''' (2019) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *'''Mississippi''' (2019) | ||
== Rescission == | == Rescission == | ||
| − | States that have passed a Convention of States should rescind it. A recent example is the [[Delaware rescission|rescission by Delaware]] of all of its prior resolutions for a Con Con. Here are some efforts at [[rescission 2017]] | + | States that have passed a Convention of States should rescind it. A recent example is the [[Delaware rescission|rescission by Delaware]] of all of its prior resolutions for a Con Con. Here are some efforts at [[rescission 2017]]: |
| + | |||
| + | *New Hampshire | ||
| + | *[[New Mexico HJR 10]] - passed in the New Mexico House and has moved onto the Senate | ||
| + | *North Carolina | ||
These states have rescinded their calls for a Con Con: | These states have rescinded their calls for a Con Con: | ||
| Line 61: | Line 90: | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| − | *[ | + | *[https://www.constitutiondecoded.com/index.html good links to Publius Huldah's work] |
| − | *[ | + | *[https://www.newswithviews.com/Nelson/kelleigh100.htm WOLVES IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING? - Article by Kelleigh Nelson] |
| − | *[ | + | *[https://www.noconcon.com/ "No Con Con" website from California] |
| + | *[https://www.thevillagesteaparty.org/article-v-constitution.html The Villages (FL) Tea Party opposition to Con Con] | ||
| + | *[[other Con Con]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==References== | ||
| + | <references/> | ||
[[category:ConCon]] | [[category:ConCon]] | ||
Latest revision as of 15:47, 21 November 2021
See also Top ten reasons to oppose a Con Con and Convention of States.
The 21 States being targeted by the promoters of a constitutional convention -- a "Con Con" or "Convention of States" -- for 2017 listed below.
- Our won-loss record as of June 30, 2017: 18 wins, plus 3 rescissions, and only 4 losses. Our victories have been in Arkansas, Idaho (our defeat of another constitutional convention proposal doomed the COS there), Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina (in committee), South Dakota (floor vote), Utah (floor vote), Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Rescissions were by Maryland, Nevada, and New Mexico. Only Arizona, North Dakota, Texas, and (with conditions) Missouri have passed Convention of States this year.
Targeted states:
- Arkansas, SJR 2[1] - DEFEATED COS by a 13-17 vote on Senate floor (1/30/17).
- Arizona - passed House narrowly
- Colorado
- Idaho - SCR108 (BBA) was defeated by a wide margin. HCR018 (COS) was introduced Feb. 23 and is in the Idaho House State Affairs Committee.
- Kansas[2] - HCR 5005 - House committee rejected it 9-13 on Feb. 15th[3] - Kansas Constitution requires a 2/3rds super-majority vote for this
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri - passed House committee on Feb. 14
- Montana - HJ8 (COS) was tabled in its committee - VICTORY!
- Nebraska - LR6 passed out of committee (only one legislative chamber in Nebraska).
- North Carolina - HJR44 (COS), SJR36 (COS) - referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Operations; rescission bill is HJR52
- North Dakota - HCR3006 (COS), passed in House committee 2/10, on House floor now - but notice that it differs from other COS resolutions; also HCR3008 (WP); Senate passed both SCR4006 (Countermand) and SB2145 (Delegate).
- Ohio[4]
- South Carolina
- South Dakota - COS had three paid lobbyists there in 2016 - WE WON IN 28-40 VOTE IN HOUSE ON 2/13/17
- Texas - Texas SJR 2 passed the Senate due to Big Money donations behind it in Texas.
- Utah - On reconsideration, it was DEFEATED by 12-16-1 in the Senate.
- Virginia - Convention of States lobbied the Legislature on January 16 (called "Lee and Jackson Day" there) - BUT WE WON!!!
- Washington - SJM 8003 (COS) heard but failed to pass in senate committee by the Feb. 17th deadline; no hearing for HJM 4006 and 4003 in House before the February 17th cutoff so that are done also.
- West Virginia - passed the Senate without a mandatory committee hearing, moves to the House. [1]
- Wisconsin (bills 800, 1541, 799)
- Wyoming HJ1 (COS) Failed 18-42 (1/30/17)
Contents
Passed COS
Only 15 states have enacted resolutions for a Convention of States, some using language different from others.[5] Each of these states should rescind its call:
- Alaska HJR 22 (2014) - "BE IT RESOLVED that, under art. V, Constitution of the United States, the Alaska State Legislature respectfully applies to the United States Congress to call a convention of the states for the sole purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office of federal government officials;"
- Alabama (HJR112, 2015)
- Arizona (2017)
- Florida (SM476, 2014)
- Georgia (SR736, 2014)
- Indiana SJR 14 (2016)- "The legislature of the State of Indiana hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints of the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress."
- Louisiana HCR 52 - "THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislature of Louisiana does hereby memorialize and apply to the United States Congress for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution to limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, impose fiscal restraints upon its activities, and limit the terms of office that may be served by its officials and by members of Congress."
- Missouri SCR4 (2017) - contains a 5-year sunset provision (this provision was later repealed)
- North Dakota (2017)
- Tennessee SJR 67 (2016) - "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE OF THE ONE HUNDRED NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CONCURRING, that this legislative body does hereby apply to Congress under the provisions of Article V of the United States Constitution for the calling of a convention of the states, limited to proposing amendments to the United States Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office ...."
- Texas (2017)
- Arkansas (2019)
- Utah (2019)
- Mississippi (2019)
Rescission
States that have passed a Convention of States should rescind it. A recent example is the rescission by Delaware of all of its prior resolutions for a Con Con. Here are some efforts at rescission 2017:
- New Hampshire
- New Mexico HJR 10 - passed in the New Mexico House and has moved onto the Senate
- North Carolina
These states have rescinded their calls for a Con Con:
- Alabama (1988)
- Florida (1988) — as amended by S0010 (2010)
- Louisiana (1990)
- Idaho (1999)
- Utah (2001)
- North Dakota (2001)
- Arizona (2003)
- Virginia (2004)
- South Carolina (2004)
- Georgia (2004)
- Wyoming — HEJR0003 (2009)
- Oklahoma — SJR 11 (2009)
- Missouri — SCR 10 (2009) - this did not pass
- South Dakota — HB 1135 (2010)
- New Hampshire — HCR28 (2010)
- Tennessee — HJR0030 (2010)
- Delaware — HCR60 (2016)
See also
- good links to Publius Huldah's work
- WOLVES IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING? - Article by Kelleigh Nelson
- "No Con Con" website from California
- The Villages (FL) Tea Party opposition to Con Con
- other Con Con
References
- ↑ https://5newsonline.com/2016/12/30/arkansas-legislators-file-resolutions-for-convention-of-states-to-reign-in-u-s-government/
- ↑ https://www.kvoe.com/newsedit/16785-kansas-convention-of-states-making-push-for-formal-application
- ↑ https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article132999744.html
- ↑ https://limaohio.com/news/223041/amy-eddings-a-more-engaged-citizenry-is-his-new-years-resolution
- ↑ Fewer than states have passed identical language, according to this report.
