The planning convention in Nashville, Tennessee would pave the way for an amendments convention called under Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
Representatives from many, possibly all, states could converge on Nashville, Tennessee in July to prepare for America’s first-ever Article V convention for proposing a constitutional amendment.

The “planning convention” scheduled to occur in the Chambers of the Tennessee House of Representatives from July 11–13, 2017, would propose rules for a later gathering that would propose a balanced budget amendment (BBA) to the U.S. Constitution.

Authorization for the planning convention will derive from the Tennessee House’s concurrence with Tennessee Senate Joint Resolution 9, which the Senate passed 27–3 on February 6. SJR 9 would “respectfully [call] a convention of the states” for the limited purpose of preparing for proposing a BBA at a future convention. The House State Government Subcommittee was scheduled to consider a sim... on February 22 as of press time.

Article V of the Constitution requires Congress to call an amendments convention when two-thirds of all states, 34, have submitted matching resolutions. So far, 28 states have passed BBA applications, of which 26 match, and more are now in the works.

Education and advocacy groups—including Citizens for Self-Government, Compact for America, and the BBA Task Force—are promoting application resolutions in at least eight states in which they say each legislative chamber is likely to approve such legislation by 2018: Arizona, Idaho, Kentucky, Minnesota, South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Planning Improves Performance

Dave Guldenschuh, editor and publisher of the Article V Convention Legislative Progress Report and a practicing attorney, says the planning convention will pave the way for a prospective Article V convention.

“The Tennessee Planning Convention is designed to allow for the orderly progression to the BBA convention once the threshold of 34 states is reached, triggering Congress to call the convention,” Guldenschuh said.

A dry run could help states, as opposed to Congress, maintain control of the logistics of an Article V convention, Guldenschuh says.

“As Congress is empowered to designate a time and place for the convening of the eventual BBA convention, the Planning Convention could make a recommendation to Congress on such and avoid Congress having to deal with that issue in its convening resolution,” Guldenschuh said.

States could help an Article V convention run more smoothly by sending the same delegates to the Tennessee Planning Convention in July and a future Article V convention, Guldenschuh says.

“[B]y sending essentially the same delegation to Tennessee as to the eventual BBA convention, the Planning Convention could … adopt a set of rules that would already have the approval of a majority of states when the eventual BBA Convention meets and thereby avoid any delay in getting to the merits of the BBA convention,” Guldenschuh said.

Constitutional Health Care

Lindsay Boyd, director of policy at the Beacon Center of Tennessee, says states could use an Article V convention to limit federal government spending on taxpayer-funded health insurance programs.

“To the extent that the convention will restrain Washington, DC spending, we expect that Medicaid and Medicare would be forced to undergo extensive reforms, as these programs are among the largest ballooning federal budget items,” Boyd said.

Health care is one of several areas states are preparing to reclaim from federal jurisdiction, Boyd says.

“There is a general sense of confidence that the states are poised to reclaim constitutional responsibilities that we’ve slowly ceded to Washington, DC over time, such as our right to manage our own health care marketplace, allow insurers to design unique and mandate-light plans for varying demographic profiles, determine the most efficient parameters and metrics for our welfare programs, and have the flexibility for federal match dollars for education to flow directly to parents for educational choice programs developed by the states,” Boyd said.

Obamacare, Trump Unknowns

Guldenschuh says BBA ratification could force federal regulators to reduce spending on subsidized health insurance and Social Security.

“It will require short-term and long-term planning that will stabilize our Medicare and Medicaid programs, as well as the ACA or its successor program,” Guldenschuh said. “Social Security and health care are high-priority programs within our federal government, right behind national defense. Thus, one would expect that priority to be reflected in the budget process.”

Whether President Donald Trump will help, hinder, or ignore attempts to call an Article V convention or propose and ratify a BBA remains unknown, Guldenschuh says.

“I think the jury remains out on whether and how much the Trump administration will do to bring about governmental reform and, to the extent necessary, constitutional reform,” Guldenschuh said.

The Trump administration’s action or inaction on repealing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) could indicate whether Trump would welcome a constitutional limitation on federal government spending during his presidency, Guldenschuh says.

“[The Trump administration] has pledged not to cut entitlements, which includes Medicare and Medicaid,” Guldenschuh says. “It is committed to reforming the ACA but hasn’t offered the kind of specifics necessary to assess its commitments.”


https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/states-prepare-dry-run-...

Views: 146

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I think anytime states get together for an article V convention is a good day for this Republic.

If the BBA is successful, what will be the remedy to bring it back into balance? Higher taxes and fees that every weasel politician would say they were against...but, the law requires it.  Term Limits, with salary/ benefits caps equal to all other part time workers in America is the cure for most of our govt. issues.

this sounds like it's a continuation of the current COS project's stated desire to utilize an Article V COS on a permanent basis. To make a permanently ongoing COS the states' method of having influence on fed/gov laws.

Which is wrong-minded at it's core. It's creating yet another level of government, which should be no surprise result of politicians' attempts to provide solutions. It also is a backwards attempt of restoring states' influence on fed/gov lawmaking. If the states want their intended influence back permanently, which they most certainly should, it only takes ONE COS with one goal in mind. To repeal the poisonous 14th, 16th and 17th amendments.  -- Restore the recipe to get the desired product, remove the poisonous ingredients wrongfully added to it.

as far as BBA goes, WHO really believes congress would ever honor such a law?? From day one they'd be passing more laws to subvert a BBA to retain their unlimited powers to spend our money and our children's and grandchildren's as they damn well please.

My problem is why where allowed to get away with the 16th and 17th Amendments in the first place.

They are grossly misusing the 14th, IMHO.  This was for slaves: Not for every baby who's parent manages to get here and have a baby.

Again, IMHO, congress will not do anything amount any of them as they bound to their lobbyists who make sure they get elected.

the 14th enabled the 16th and 17th by making the states and us all individually subordinate to fed/gov. Before the 14th we were all individually 1st citizens of our state, and subordinate to state laws - who had the choice of whether it (a state) wanted to cooperate with what fed/gov wanted. Any taxation that fed/gov wanted to put on us individually had to be filtered through the state 1st. The 14th gave fed/gov direct authority over us individually, enabling direct taxation (16th). The 14th made states subordinate to fed/gov, which enabled the 17th.

The 13th amendment freed the slaves, ended slavery. The 14th was the purpose of the civil war though, per Lincoln's letter to Horace Greeley. -- http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm --

In that letter Lincoln makes it very clear ending slavery was not his motivation for the civil war, restoring national authority was. That's what the 14th accomplished, and abandoned the original design and original intent of the design our founders created. It didn't free anybody, it enslaved everybody.

Larry,

Thank you for enlightening me.  I had heard people argue that the Civil War was not about freeing the slaves.  None could cite the reference as you have.  

I believe I'm starting to get the grasp of what you mean about enslaving everybody.

What I immediately went to in the 14th was the fact that they meant this for the children of slaves to be included; not all babies born in the US to non-citizens.  They have basterised this clause for years to a conclusion that is what was meant.

I have read the 14th A. a thousand times and I still do not interpret it the way the Supremes have…. There is NO superiority implied other than what was ratified in the beginning. We have ALL been recognized as citizen of the US……. The preamble confirms this …WE THE PEOPLE of the United States,

@ Larry

as far as BBA goes, WHO really believes congress would ever honor such a law??

Ya, think about that for a few minutes. You know they'll have their lawyers and federal agencies find creative ways to skirt around it as long as the progressive roots of the 14th, 16th, and 17th amendments exist.

Why all the Rules?

A History of Budget and Accounting

https://fiscal.treasury.gov/fstraining/events/08_History_Budget_Acc...

this sounds like it's a continuation of the current COS project's stated desire to utilize an Article V COS on a permanent basis. To make a permanently ongoing COS the states' method of having influence on fed/gov laws.

Larry, if you go to the FOAVC website the owner of that website has stated several times" the states have long since achieved the necessary two thirds submissions required to cause a convention call." So it could possibly be the reason why the States are preparing for a dry run. As far as the COS balanced budget amendment ....the count is nine.

March 14, 2017  Arizona is #9! State legislature votes to call a Convention of States

https://www.cosaction.com/arizona_is_9_state_votes_to_call_a_conven...

.

Selected Memorials - Clerk of the United States House of ...

clerk.house.gov/legislative/memorials.aspx

138 rows · Office of the Clerk, United States House of Representatives. 115th Congress ... Selected Memorials The chair ...

http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/memorials.aspx

.

.

FOAVC

FRIENDS OF THE ARTICLE V CONVENTION

Page 4--The AVC Legislative Report

While FOAVC has, up to now, published the Article V Convention Legislative Report published by Georgia attorney David Guldenschuh, FOAVC believes that this report presents inaccurate information regarding Article V Convention applications by the states.

The report does not accurately reflect the actual state of current applications on file with Congress. We suggest those wishing to see the overall record of applications examine this link showing the applications grouped according to application sets. The Constitution does not require state applications be on the same amendment to cause Congress to call a convention nor does it require state submit multiple applications before Congress is required to call a convention.

However, the AVC Legislative Report is as far as is known, the only source of information regarding current efforts by various political groups to obtain new applications to be submitted by the various state legislatures to Congress. These groups erroneously believe only if two thirds of the states submit identical applications on their particular application is Congress then mandated to call a convention limited, of course, to only their amendment issues. Further these groups may claim an application as supporting their political movement when the facts speak differently such as is demonstrated by a recent application by the State of Arizona. We urge all to read the actual documentation of the application available on our site to reach any conclusion regarding any application.

FOAVC emphasizes: the states have long since achieved the necessary two thirds submissions required to cause a convention call. The courts have never ruled applications must be on the same amendment subject in order for Congress to be required to call a convention. On May 5, 1789, Congress established the process for the handling of state applications for a convention call. That process was based on a numeric count of applications with no other terms or conditions described. The process continues to this day.

The most current version of the AVC Legislative Report (March 17, 2017) is shown below:



20170317

http://foavc.org/

http://www.foavc.org/Pages/Page_Four.htm

I am not clear at all of any down sides for not having COS. Well perhaps one and that would be for Congress members. So why are States dragging their feet?

"So why are States dragging their feet"

Lot of talk going on for years so I assume the States have taken into consideration the pros and cons. 

This might help you out....

List of Rescissions of Article V Convention Applications

Excerpt....

Recent activities

The legislatures of some states which, at various times, have made application to Congress for the calling of an Article V amendatory convention, have later rescinded such petitions. During the period between 1988 and 2016, it is known that lawmakers in 18 states adopted legislation to rescind previous legislative measures to apply for such a convention. Perhaps there were others in addition to the 18 which are confirmed. Remaining unclear from the language of Article V—and subject to debate—is whether an application, once made by a state legislature, may be subsequently revoked by that state's legislature.

Interestingly, from 2008 to 2016 in 10 of those very same 18 states, lawmakers changed their minds yet again—back in the direction of favoring that an Article V amendatory convention in fact be called.

List of state legislative rescissions (1988–2016)

Read more at  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rescissions_of_Article_V_Conv...

.

https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/amendments-to-the-cons...

So AM, thanks for all the sources you have posted.

I am beginning to think that the COS is 'perhaps' a way for slowing down a call to return to those powers of the purse to limit spending by the federal gov't e.g. limit gov't.

At the speed this process is moving along well the chances for it happening is not bright.

The old statement "follow the dollars" seems to apply -- applications filed and resented is a ever changing loop. Guess "all politics is local" taken seriously would help closing the loop. 

RSS

Please Lend A Hand

An urgent call to all Patriots!

With our change of ownership, we're being invoiced at a higher rate now so we need your help.  Things cannot continue on this way.  Please consider contributing today.  Click "Donate" below.


Live Feed - See our Visitors

© 2017   Created by Kos.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service