Starting this conversation with a post giving detailed background of what Article 5 is all about. YOU decide from there. READ THE POST before you comment.
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/huldah/191107
Note: Convention of States project runs this website "openthestates.com". Whether you knew it or not before, now you do. A secondary question might be: "Why would a group that wants a Convention of States run a website under another name, for another purpose?" Not a conspiracy theory, just a question to ponder. Again, read the link above from Publius Huldah, with links to multiple other sites. It is well worth your time, imho.
Leatherneck: COS provided this Web site as place for all of the Open The States activists to connect and share information because social media sites, particularly FaceBook, were deleting information regarding opening up the states. The info posted on this site is not controlled by COS.
As the disclaimer states, "Convention of States Action does not control and is not responsible for the content posted on this forum. The views expressed are those of the individuals making the post and do not necessarily represent the views of COSA or its staff."
As for Publius Huldah, did you know that that is NOT her real name. She is not who she says she is. I will provide you with some info on her, and you decide what to believe.
Info on Publius Huldah
Publius Huldah is the pseudonym used by internet blogger Joanna Martin.[5] She received an undergraduate degree in philosophy with special focus on epistemology and political philosophy.[6] In 1973, after attending the Florida State University of Law and getting her Juris Doctorate, Martin was admitted to the Florida Bar. Her membership has since lapsed. [7]
Martin is married to Frank Scutari.[8][9] In the 1980s, Frank was accused of aiding and abetting his brother Richard Scutari with crimes relating to both The Order, a white nationalist organization, and Alan Berg murder as well as the Aryan Nations, an anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi,[10] white supremacist[11] terrorist organization. [12] According to the Sun Sentinel, Frank Scutari set up a network of rented offices that his brother Richard and other fugitives from The Order and Aryan Nations could use to communicate with each other.[12] After being arrested in February 1985, he was convicted and served three years in prison.[13] Martin served as Frank Scutari's divorce lawyer in 1988. Frank and Joanna married in 1989.[14]
LOVE the Alinsky tactics. /sarc By the number:
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
The American People can decide for themselves, without Saul Alinsky. Thank you so much MaryEllen.
@leatherneck I really don't know what you're talking about. I'm not ridiculing anyone. I'm just posting the facts. Joanna Martin, AKA Publius Huldah, conspired with a felon, and she's not a lawyer.
@leatherneck Rule #5, would that include name calling? Like accusing supporters of CoS progressives, communists, etc?
Rule #12, would that include accusing supporters of the CoS of being funded by Soros, thinking that Americans are idiots, and so on?
@MaryEllen Probanski Thanks for posting your responses. They were very insightful.
A Response to Publius Huldah by Michael Farris, J.D., LL.M. Chancellor, Patrick Henry College
Anonymous blogger Publius Huldah attacks the Founder’s solution for a runaway federal government with a series of ad hominems and misdirections. A perpetual naysayer, she can propose no better solution of her own, other than the extra-constitutional doctrine of nullification.
Huldah betrays her lack of credibility in the opening line of her email when she says there is no such thing as a Convention of States. Contrary to her assumption, that phrase is not a fabrication of ours. It comes from the very first Article V application which was filed by the state of Virginia in 1789.1 If she objects to that phrase, she had best take it up with the Founders. The bulk of her article is a giant ad hominem directed against our organization and Professor Robert Natelson. Behind all this bluster, her argument rests on two easily refuted facts: (1) the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was a runaway convention, and (2) James Madison had concerns that Article V didn’t lay out the convention process in sufficient detail. I have already debunked the first claim as a myth in my response to Mr. DeWeese, so here I will focus on the second. 1 1 ANNALS OF CONG. 258–59 (J. Gales, Sr. ed., 1834) (H.R. May 5, 1789), available at http://article5library.org/gettext.php?doc=1418. It is true that at the Constitutional Convention Madison raised some questions about “the form, quorum, &c” of such a convention. But according to Madison’s own notes, the motion to add a Convention of States to Article V passed “nem. con.” “without objection.”2 Apparently Madison had his doubts put to rest, or he didn’t consider them important enough to vote against the proposed change to Article V. If a Convention of States were the terrible constitutional reset button that Huldah describes, surely Madison, or at least one of the other Framers, would have voted against it. As it turns out, the Founders strongly supported it. In fact, Madison later expressed his staunch support for Article V in Federalist No. 43. In praise of Article V he wrote: The mode preferred by the convention, seems to be stamped with every mark of propriety. It guards against that extreme facility, which would render the constitution too mutable; and that extreme difficulty, which might perpetuate its discovered faults. There can be no doubt that Madison, like the other Founders, was a champion for Article V. Mr. DeWeese and Ms. Huldah can’t get their own story straight. DeWeese attacks the credibility of the Founders, particularly James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, by accusing them of illegally adopting the Constitution. Huldah, on the other hand, expects us to venerate this supposed tyrant and hang on his every word. How strange that they should so heavily rely on the same man they accuse of a felony. Of course, as I have argued at length, history vindicates Madison and the other Framers. We are quite right to listen to them, and their unanimous support for a Convention of States speaks volumes. 2 5 DEBATES ON THE ADOPTION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION 551 (Jonathan Elliot ed., 1827), available at http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1909/1314.05_Bk.pdf
See reply above. Decide for yourselves.
Do you remember the story in the Bible where God had Moses go lead the Jewish people out of Egypt after the 400 years of slavery? Mark is like our Moses he's trying to lead the American people to take back our freedom and Country before it's gone for good.
"Why would a group that wants a Convention of States run a website under another name, for another purpose?"
Maybe because the group values freedom and wants to equip American citizens with tools to communicate about topics being actively censored and to affect change at the government level? And maybe because the CoS is an ongoing project and this is a specific response to governors quarantining healthy people?
My answer would be: because the parent organization is Citizens for Self-Governance. COS is ultimately about more than an Article V convention - it is about self-governance.
Another conservative view regarding the Convention of States approach:
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/380467-a-convention-of-states-is-the-last-thing-america-needs-right-now
And this is a link to a not-so-conservative group who also wants a Convention of States: https://wolf-pac.com/
You really have to listen to the wolf pack propaganda closely, but they reveal their agenda for "free and fair elections" is to eliminate the electoral college. This is JUST ONE of the dangers of a cos convention....there is absolutely no idea what will come out of it - or who will control it. The unintended consequences boggle the mind.
If you think we are in a fight for our National survival over this fake chinavirus global powerplay, then you have some idea of how dangerous the convention of states idea is.
The Constitution has not been followed since before the Civil War. The degradation has increased in speed and lethality ever since 1913 - Woodrow Wilson and the Federal Reserve Act. It really kicked into high gear on 9/11/2001 and is proceeding at light speed with the global chinavirus cabal.
Does anyone recognize "equal justice for all" with SWAT raids on small business just for being open? Has anyone gone to jail for the coup attempts on President Trump? How about the death of our Ambassador in Benghazi...or does it make any difference at this point?
Passing more laws that will not be enforced, or will only be enforced on political or social enemies is NOT the solution. RESTORATION of the ORIGINAL INTENT of our CONSTITUTION is the solution. FREEDOM and individual responsibility is the solution. This can only be done if ALL AMERICANS, true Patriots, black, white, yellow, green, and orange, STAND UP for each other and DO NOT COMPLY to unconstitutional laws any longer. NONE OF THEM. The days of Tyranny are OVER. TYRANTS of all sizes we are COMING FOR YOU. Get out while you can.
We don't need to pass the buck and beg for some BS convention. We need to STAND UP and STOP TAKING THIS CRAP ANY LONGER. ALL OF US, TOGETHER.
Ben Franklin said it best: "We must all hang together, or most assuredly we will all hang separately."
The time has come - you are a Patriot or you are a Tory. The middle ground has vanished.
Well first of all, the hill isn't a conservative news source and neither is David A Super (the author). Also, ignoring the things this article just got wrong factually; there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the CoS here. Congress is a permanent constitutional convention and it can propose and pass amendments to the constitution at any time on any day of the week that it sees fit. And since members of Congress arn't voted in based on their stances of specific possible amendments there's an even greater chance that they could abuse their power. But they don't (and I don't think anyone really fears that they will).
A convention of states on the other hand has to have a resolution drafted, then it has to pass through various state committees, then throughout the state legislation process and so on. Each state has to pass the resolution in strict agreement with other states in order for their "vote" to count and so on. Then once the convention is called they still must reach consensus on the formal proposal as a convention and ratify it with a 2/3rds majority vote. (which is significantly more of a burdunous process with more oversight than if congress were to decide tomorrow to try and pass an amendment).
As for other groups trying to get various conventions of states passed sure. That happens all the time. But the sheer amount of people in government that have to sign off on these things (both democrats and republicans alike) means that in almost every case they never actually make it through to the end and in many cases never even make it past the committees to be formally voted on. Congress has passed far more amendments than any CoS ever will. But we don't see calls to disband Congress over the possibility of abuse. Why?
Can you name one reason why Congress can safely be entrusted with the power to amend the constitution that wouldn't apply to a CoS? Or one reason why a CoS should not be entrusted with the power to amend the constitution that wouldn't apply to Congress?
@leatherneck With all due respect, this Web site is not here to necessarily promote The Convention of States Project. OpenTheStates is a site for activist groups to post information on state events/rallies to fight back against state government overreach.
As far as your objections to COS, they are unfounded. You can find more information here: