CommunityFDL Main Blog

Speaker Boehner Observed by International Whistleblowers

A letter demanding an official tabulation of State legislature applications for a convention to propose amendments as prescribed in Article V of the Constitution just arrived at the Office of the Speaker of the House for John Boehner. As international observation may be required to determine if elections are being managed correctly, we reached out to internationally known whistleblowers, Karen HudesBirgitta JónsdóttirCarl Robert Gibson, and Hörður Torfason to observe how Congress handles their duty to call a convention once two-thirds of the states apply. After 238 years of application by State legislatures it is “arguable”, as the Congressional Research Service described, that States reached the threshold to trigger a convention call which Congress should have no authority to refuse.

Carl Gibson
US Uncut –

In recent years, we discovered the flaw in the process was not the inaction or incorrect action of States but Congress’ ability to ignore those applications by avoiding the count.  Both houses of Congress neglected to assign the duty to track these applications to any entity in the government.  If Congress never knows the number has been reached, they are not obligated to call the convention.  It is like a race where the runners can never see the finish line. We learned from conversations with Thomas Neale of the Congressional Research Service that in the 1970s there were 22 bills submitted to create new statutes for the Article V processes, including assigning the duty to the Clerk of House, but they all failed.

Dan Marks & Bill Walker —

On April 15th, 2013 our group, mailed an official request for a tally of these applications on record to the Clerk of House, Karen Haas after being instructed by House Parliamentarian, Tom Wickham how to submit this request for the first time in US history.  More than a year has passed since Congress received the request, although the Speaker of the House John Boehner had submitted the request to the Judiciary Committee for consideration, as you might guess, I am unaware of any plans to discuss this in the agenda in the committee anytime soon.

However Bill Walker of brought it to my attention that when the Speaker made the request for the report, it should have been directed to the Clerk of House, where we originally sent the letter, and not to a committee according to House Rule 2 (j) which specifies that,

In addition to any other reports required by the Speaker…the clerk shall report to the Committee on House Administration…

In case this was misdirected, in all fairness this would be the first time this process has ever tried to function, we needed to notify the Speaker of the House, Parliamentarian, and Clerk of House.  There is a conflict of interest when Congress considers calling a convention or merely counting these applications. It requires oversight that our domestic media has so far failed to devote any time to.

The shrinking ability of Congress to ignore these applications was exacerbated by the State of Michigan as they declared they are the 34th state and final state needed to trigger the convention and the request to the Speaker by Rep. Duncan Hunter for a tabulation of the applications Michigan acknowledged.

So what is my hurry if the pressure is building?  First, it should not take so long. If all else fails Congress can verify by inquiry with the state of origin. That would take about a few days, certainly not a year.

Secondly, this matter was never meant to be deliberated by members of Congress.  “Congress shall have ‘no vote, debate or committee’ regarding state applications” once the proper number of states has been presented. Along with our original request we presented 42 scanned copies of the applications of 42 states (34 states would trigger a convention) which we believe are legal and still standing today.

Third, our country is begging to change this system, a long train of abuses and usurpations is reducing the People to absolute despotism. We need to revive OUR Constitution.

Lastly there are attempts to insure that states will puppet the delegates. Last month Florida became the 4th state to outlaw an election of delegates to a convention to propose amendments, and took away the right to deliberate as a delegate. “If a delegate does not follow those instructions, their vote would be voided and their appointment to the convention would be forfeited. They also could be charged with a third-degree felony.” The media failed to point out this process would cancel an election.

Wisconsin legislators are also looking at model legislation from ALEC that, “2. Prohibits Delegates from Attending a Convention for Proposing Amendments if Congress Mandates Proportional Representation.”

As a matter of fact, Congress has already mandated an election of delegates. Some legislators in Wisconsin hate the idea that the People may actually elect delegates:

(2) the term ‘election’ means—
(E) the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States or of any State; and

Unfortunately We the People cannot be magnanimous or patient about Congress’ pace to fulfill their duty under Article V.  We do not have the luxury of time when powers that be rig this process before it is called. The right to alter, or to abolish is a real thing. It belongs to We the People.  States will have final say in the ratification process.  Nothing will be amended to the Constitution without the consent of 38 or 75% of the states.  That is an action that would reflect the republican model of government in every respect because it represents an authentic act of the whole people:

Previous post

Heartbreaking Eid in Palestine

Next post

Late Night: Piketty's Failure of Nerve, or Why Marx Is Still the Boogeyman

Oxdown Diaries

Oxdown Diaries