Spring Break
A vote for a 'Con Con' could have curbed freedoms
Gabe Kovacs
Issue date: 1/26/09 Section: Commentary
On December 10, 2008, most students were buried six feet deep in books studying for final exams. Little did they know that something big was happening in the political world that could have been a stepping-stone to changing the United States forever. Ohio state legislators were holding a vote that could have passed a bill calling for a national Constitutional Convention (commonly known as a Con Con). A Con Con is an act in our government that allows the U.S. Constitution to be rewritten or replaced without any restrictions.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution defines when Con Con can be held. There are two ways Congress can vote for a Con Con; either a two-thirds vote from both Houses or if two-thirds of the state legislators pass a bill calling for a Con Con.
Currently, 22 states have a bill calling for a Con Con. Ten states passed a Con Con resolution, but later rescinded it. Seventeen states have not passed anything regarding a Con Con.
Article V and the rest of the U.S. Constitution do not provide much information about how a Constitutional Convention should be held. The only thing known about a Con Con is that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are completely thrown up for grabs, allowing anything or everything to be changed, altered, distorted or deemed obsolete. This power is very dangerous and could completely destroy what America has stood for since 1776: freedom.
The last Con Con was held in 1787, when every state called to replace the Articles of Confederation with a better system of government.
Fifty-five delegates from every state except Rhode Island gathered in Philadelphia to write a new Constitution. Delegates included George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They knew what small changes were needed to create a governing system that worked. Their product of that convention, the U.S. Constitution, has proven itself for over 220 years.
However, in today's world, where the views of the founding fathers are not as strong as they were, a Con Con is not the brightest idea. Washington D.C. is filled with radical liberals and neo-conservatives who do not consider the freedoms of the citizens their first priority. Do the citizens of America really want them to have complete control over the document that gives Americans their freedoms?
Article V of the U.S. Constitution defines when Con Con can be held. There are two ways Congress can vote for a Con Con; either a two-thirds vote from both Houses or if two-thirds of the state legislators pass a bill calling for a Con Con.
Currently, 22 states have a bill calling for a Con Con. Ten states passed a Con Con resolution, but later rescinded it. Seventeen states have not passed anything regarding a Con Con.
Article V and the rest of the U.S. Constitution do not provide much information about how a Constitutional Convention should be held. The only thing known about a Con Con is that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are completely thrown up for grabs, allowing anything or everything to be changed, altered, distorted or deemed obsolete. This power is very dangerous and could completely destroy what America has stood for since 1776: freedom.
The last Con Con was held in 1787, when every state called to replace the Articles of Confederation with a better system of government.
Fifty-five delegates from every state except Rhode Island gathered in Philadelphia to write a new Constitution. Delegates included George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They knew what small changes were needed to create a governing system that worked. Their product of that convention, the U.S. Constitution, has proven itself for over 220 years.
However, in today's world, where the views of the founding fathers are not as strong as they were, a Con Con is not the brightest idea. Washington D.C. is filled with radical liberals and neo-conservatives who do not consider the freedoms of the citizens their first priority. Do the citizens of America really want them to have complete control over the document that gives Americans their freedoms?
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Bill Walker
posted 1/26/09 @ 4:06 PM EST
With all respect to Mr. Kovacs, I'm sorry to point out he has made several factual errors in his commentary.
1. He states "there are two ways Congress can vote for a Con Con; either a two-thirds vote from both Houses or if two-thirds of the state legislators pass a bill for a Con Con. (Continued…)
Post a Comment