Kill the Constitutional Convention Resolutions in the Legislature!

Don’t Mess With Our Constitution!

Resolutions Calling for a Constitutional Convention (ConCon) have Been Filed by Republicans in Both the House and the Senate. They must be stopped!!

  • SJR1—Ogden; 
  • SJR10—Florence Shapiro; 
  • SJR15—Wentworth; HJR60—Pitts; 
  • HJR69—Kolkhorst.

The well-intended purpose for calling a ConCon is to enact a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA).

The risk of a Constitutional Convention outweighs any hoped-for good results. Once the convention convenes there is no provision in the constitution, or in law, to limit the convention to any one agenda item.

A Runaway Convention Carries a Host of Unintended Consequences:

  • Repeal of the Second Amendment (the gun-grabbers would love this) 
  • Repeal of the 10th Amendment (the Feds would love this) 
  • Repeal of the Electoral College (in favor of a popular vote) The liberals would love this! 
  • Repeal of presidential term limits (this should remain in place) 
  • Recognition of International Law as a part of our Supreme Court decision-making (already being done unconstitutionally) 
  • Re-write of the Fourteenth Amendment by excluding the ‘under the jurisdiction thereof’ phrase to include children born of Illegal Aliens 
  • Adoption of a North American Union (open borders—proposed by George W. Bush )

These are but a few of the problems with which we would be faced.

A BBA would not control federal spending. It would merely give political cover to the big-spenders to raise taxes because the BBA would require a tax increase or exorbitant fees to balance the budget. How else to get revenues to match the uncapped spending? The newly proposed Federal BBA Amendment should be closely scrutinized to see that it guards against higher taxes and requires spending reductions and/or caps before endorsing it. The cost of waging a campaign against bad amendments would be enormous!

Fighting the liberal media, which would be in support of liberty-destroying amendments, would be an expensive, ominous and potentially losing task!

In today’s highly contentious political climate, it makes no sense to subject the wisdom of our godly Constitutional Founders to the destruction of the safeguards against governmental oppression embodied in the Constitution.

Other Methods of Balancing the Budget

The budget could be balanced through specific legislation calling for a Balanced Budget without an amendment– or through the traditional process of a congressional Balanced Budget Amendment in Congress which would then have to be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures. Before it is embraced, this newly proposed Federal Balanced Budget Amendment should be closely scrutinized to see that it guards against higher taxes and requires spending reductions

But, the Constitutional Convention process should never be considered for any reason however well-intended.

The original intent of the Constitution is sufficient to meet today’s needs if the president, members of congress and the judiciary would honor and enforce it. If they ignore what the Constitution says now, why should we expect them to enforce any new conservative amendment/s?

The aforementioned legislative Resolutions will probably be voted the week of January 31-February 4–first in the Texas Senate and then in the House. Contact your state Representative and state Senator immediately to OPPOSE all resolutions calling for a ConCon.


Urge your state Senator and Representative to read Phyllis Schlafly’s excellent expose’ of a ConCon — Good advice Against a ConCon

CON CON: Playing Russian Roulette with the Constitution –Dec. 1984 Phyllis Schlafly

Immediate Action Needed!

Contact your State Senator and Representative Now.



Make sure to check out the comments on Facebook.

At this point the country is broken.  We are headed to the worst financial disaster imaginable and the destruction of our Republic due to runaway spending.
Now IS THE TIME for a ConCon.  Those who oppose it out of fear, don't deserve to save the Republic. 
If we fail to call it or we continue on the same path, Texas might as well secede.  
If the 2nd, 10th, etc. are destroyed in the process, so be it.  Revolution is the next viable option.  Peaceful if possible.

For one who is supposedly concerned about preserving our Republic and yet are willing to destroy, "so be it", the Second Amendment,the 10th Amendment, Repeal the Electoral College in favor of a popular vote, Legalize International Law as the basis for Supreme Court decisions, Re-write the 14th Amendment to include as citizens of the USA children born of Illegal Aliens, and to Eliminate our Borders, is the height of ignorance and a sure way to destroy our Republic!

Ms. Spellerberg, if you are so vehemently opposed to holding a Constitutional Convention such as the one called for in Senator Jeff Wentworth's SJR 15, how can you possibly hold yourself out to be a conservative?  It seems you are more interested in protecting the status quo, much as the RINO's with whom we are all so fed up.

You need to support this effort.  Senator Wentworth's resolution calling for a Con-Con is explicitly for the "exclusive" purposes stated therein.  If 2/3 of the States were to pass similar language, then the convention would be limited to just those agenda items.

Yes, this has never been tried before.  But it does offer us an avenue that was put in place by our Founders to set the house straight.  The federal government has run roughshod over the parts of the Constitution that they can "re-interpret."  There is no ambiguity in what Senator Wentworth is proposing and no room for loose interpretation.  Two six year terms as a Senator means just cannot be ignored, despite what the Progressives say.

Think about it.  This is a rare and golden opportunity to take the country back from the self-styled ruling class.  We must all support this effort with all we can muster.

Bill--If you truly believe that supporters of the ConCon resolutions are smarter than former Supreme Court Justice Warren Berger, and other bi-partisan constituional scholars, who have made it clear that a ConCon cannot be limited to any one agenda item, then you are sadly mistaken and your support of a onCon is misinformed and incorrect. Think again!

First of all, if you read SJR 15 you will note that the resolution calls for the Convention to deal "exclusively" with the matters set forth in the resolution along with the organizational matters of the Convention.  If all of the States supported similar language in their resolutions there would be no additional items brought up.  Secondly the "scare scenario" that you bring up would have to entail (1) a radical faction somehow gaining control of the Convention and passing radically negative amendments.  Then, (2) Those amendments would then have to be approved by three-fourths of the State Legislatures in order to become part of the Constitution.  The chances of both of those circumstances occurring are so remote that they don't even merit consideration.

No, holding a legitimate Constitutional Convention to enact the changes envisioned by SJR 15 provides us with a fantastic opportunity to bring the Washington elites to heel.  That is something that we will likely never accomplish through the election process alone.  To not support such a golden opportunity is to support the status quo and the retention of power and position by the self-styled "ruling elite."  There will be many along the way such as former Justice Burger and yourself, whose unspoken agenda is to just keep things the way they are now so that power can continue to reside with basically a handful of professional politicians as opposed to the true "Citizen-Legislature" that the Founders envisioned.

You need to support this effort rather than crying "bogeyman."

Ms. Spellerberg, you are way out in "left" field on this one.  Do you actually think that 3/4 of the states would pass off on any amendments that took away gun rights?  or that legalized illegal aliens?  or any other of the items you talk about??  You sound like Chicken Little, but your just trying to scare people into killing what is probably the best idea to come along in many years.  I say have the constitutional convention and let's tidy up the things that our Founders never thought they would have to include because there was just no way that we would ever be so dumb to allow to happen.  But these thing have happened and freedom is vanishing every day.  This is the last best hope for our country.  The alternative is to just sit and watch our great-grandchildren, who haven't even been born yet, be saddled with a crushing debt burden because our Washington power elites don't have the guts to tell us that we can't have everything we want with someone else paying for it.  Smell the Coffee!!

Leroy seems to have a lot of faith in fellow citizens even with all the weirdness out there from the gay rights  activist to Peta and you can be sure they will all be there. If Leroy knows someone that is just as smart as our fouding fathers I wish he would introduce them to me.

First of all, Senator Wentworth's resolution is NOT for a convention that would open up the Constitution to any and all changes.  It is for an "Article V" convention which is solely to recommend amendments to the existing Constitution.  It is for the EXCLUSIVE (look it up, the word is in the resolution) purpose of debating and possibly adopting amendments to the Constitution dealing with (1) term limits for Senators and Representatives, (2) a balanced budget requirement, (3) a limit on the amount of debt that the United States can guarantee, (4) a line item veto for the President, and (5) a provision whereby 2/3's of the States can vote to repeal any law passed by Congress.

After the convention agrees to amendments on those items, and those items alone, the amendments are then passed on to the States for ratification.  They only become a part of the Constitution if 3/4 of the State Legislatures agree to it.  So, for example, the convention will NOT be legally allowed to propose a repeal of the 2nd amendment.  And even if they did, do you honestly think 2/3 of the State Legislatures would approve that?

Your smug condescension in your comment is not conducive to a good exchange of ideas, nor does it show that you have given any meaningful study to this subject matter.  Our forefathers gave us Article V of the Constitution as a remedy for just such a time as we now find overbearing federal government that is operating way beyond anything ever envisioned by the founders.  And if you don't believe me, do a little reading of the federalist papers, as well as the anti-federalist papers.  The fear of an Article V convention is misplaced and ignorant of history and in keeping with those who are satisfied with the status-quo in Washington.  Is that where you fall out?

© 2015 TexasGOPVote  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy