New Mexico Rescinds All Previous Article V Con Con Applications

Freedom Outpost – by Tim Brown

On Wednesday, New Mexico rescinded all previous resolutions from decades ago that call for an Article V Constitutional Convention to amend the US Constitution.

According to resolution, which was introduced by Speaker of the House Brian Egolf (D), joint resolutions passed in 1951, 1965, and 1976 that made an application to Congress for the calling of a convention to propose an amendment to the United States Constitution, are rescinded.  

After citing Article V of the US Constitution, the resolution goes on to state each of the previously mentioned resolutions passed by the legislature in New Mexico concerning an application for a Constitutional Convention.

It then adds:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that House Joint Resolution Number 12, passed in the first session of the twentieth legislature of the state of New Mexico, Senate Joint Resolution Number 2, passed in the first session of the twenty-seventh legislature of the state of New Mexico, and Senate Joint Resolution 1, passed in the second session of the thirty-second legislature of the state of New Mexico, be rescinded; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be transmitted, within thirty days of its passage, to the speaker of the United States house of representatives, the clerk of the United States house of representatives, the president of the United States senate, the secretary of the United States senate and the members of the New Mexico congressional delegation; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a request be hereby made that the official journals and record of the senate and the house of representatives of the United States congress include the resolution or a notice of its receipt.

Rebeccas Segal recounts a bit of history over the past few decades of the fight against having an Article V constitutional convention.

“Balanced Budget Amendment Article V applications passed in 32 states during the 1970’s, 80’s and 90’s,” she writes.  “The BBA nearly succeeded in achieving the needed 34 states for an Article V Convention. Our strategy became one of the rescissions. We began efforts to rescind in many states, rescinding in state after state until we rescinded the Article V BBA in 16 states. That ended their nearly successful drive for an Article V Convention and stopped their efforts for more than a decade.”

“We must implement this Rescission Strategy again if we are to successfully stop the multiple efforts for an Article V Convention, including Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA), Convention of States, Compact for Balanced Budget Amendment, the Article V to overturn Citizens United, and others,” she added.  “In 2016 Delaware passed a Resolution Rescinding all previous Article V Applications which helped to stop the momentum of the BBA which now has 28 instead of 29 states.  Copies of Delaware’s Resolution and a sample rescission resolution from Alabama are available.”

Many organizations like American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and Convention of States claim that the convention can be controlled.  However, since the Congress is the one to be petitioned, and since the Constitution provides only one branch of government for establishing legislation concerning the central government, it has been assumed that Congress would establish the rules of the convention, not the states.

The only precedent we have for an amending of an American Constitution is the Constitutional Convention of 1787.  In that convention, the participants went well beyond their mandate of amending the Constitution to writing an entirely new one and adding Article VII to it, which altered the ratification constraints of the Articles of Confederation from unanimous consent of the thirteen states to:

“The ratification of the conventions of nine states, shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the states so ratifying the same.”

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote, a “Constitutional Convention today would be a free-for-all for special interest groups.”

The problem with many of the amendments people want to add is that they are seeking to add amendments to make Washington obey the Constitution when those people are disobeying the words that are already in the Constitution.  The remedy is not amendments with more words.  The remedy is to start holding representatives judicially accountable for their crimes against the people and for the people to return to the God of our nation’s foundation.

Freedom Outpost