Restoring the United States to a Constitutional Republic

Has the country fallen too far to be restored to its founding as a Constitutional Republic?  The drift towards socialism is not just the political disregard for the Constitution; there are bigger factors contributing to where the United States finds itself today.

The current administration is definitely responsible for the recent rapid growth in government dependence and insurmountable federal debt.  However, the administration minions are not the only ones at fault, the GOP is also culpable as are the disinterested citizenry of the country.  Nor can we forget the Politically Correct main stream media’s
contribution in its abandonment of unbiased objectivity in reporting on the political landscape.

Of all the reasons, the citizenry holds the lion’s share in the demise of the American way of life.  It is the citizen who has become comfortable with government handouts (state & federal).  It is the citizen who has embraced “Political Correctness”.  It is the citizen who has turned his/her back on the strict adherence to the Constitution and the religious principles, the BEDROCK our country was founded upon.

Can the country return to the legacy our founding fathers gave to us, or have we drifted too far?

What, if anything, can we do?  The founding fathers were visionary leaders and astute historians; they knew the nature of men and what had happened to free civilizations in the historical past; therefore, provided a means for the “people” to take control of their government when, not if, but WHEN their government became oppressively power hungry.

Colonel George Mason of Virginia had grave concerns about the federal legislature controlling the only means of amending the Constitution and fought vigorously for state authority to call for conventions to amend the Constitution.  It was because of Colonel Mason’s persistent insistence for a state’s authority to be maintained that Article V of the US Constitution provides two methods by which the Constitution can be amended.

Article V:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to the Constitution, or, on the application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendments which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses of the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it’s equal Suffrage in the Senate. (emphasis added)

Our founding fathers understood that there would be a time when the "People" would need a means by which to maintain their control of their governance; therefore, the means to do so was provided in Article V of the Constitution.
Our founding fathers understood that there would be a time when the “People” would need a means by which to maintain their control of their governance; therefore, the means to do so was provided in Article V of the Constitution.

The intent of the framers of the Constitution was to limit the power of the central (federal) government to just those items delegated to it in Article I, Section 8 (further amplified in the tenth Amendment); thereby, securing States Rights, the sovereignty of each of the several States, and self-governance of the people and by the people.

Mark Levin in his latest book, The LIBERTY AMENDMENTS Restoring The American Republic, lays out the case that NOW is the time for the several States to align and exercise their constitutionally based authority, not to re-write the Constitution, but to amend the Constitution for the purpose of restoring the country to a REPUBLIC.

Mr. Levin points out that this second method of amending the Constitution has unsuccessfully been tried in the past.  Just because it has not succeeded in the past does not me the several States should not join forces and utilize their constitutional right to use it now.  Today is a different time, we now find ourselves under what Mr. Levin identifies as ‘Soft Tyranny’.  I contend that with Obamacare and all of the regulatory edicts by numerous
entities run by non-elected minions it more resembles hard tyranny.

Our federal government, all three branches and both major political parties, are abandoning the Constitution.  All are aiding and abetting each other at the expense and enslavement of the citizens.  What better time to bring the several States Legislatures method to life and lawfully return our federal government to the framers vision of a REPUBLICAN form of governing!!!

If the several States are successful in amending the Constitution in this manner we need to remember that this is only the initial step to return to our superior form of governance.  To maintain and continue it very citizen MUST do a paradigm shift from passive political indifference to being truly informed and actively involved in their governance.  In addition, the vast majority of the citizenry need to return to and firmly grasp hold of the constitutional principles that have made our country the shining light on the hill.

The time for you to support every means available to restore our Republic is NOW.  If not you, who?  It is OUR country, not just the country of the political elite.  Call and write your state legislators requesting that your State exercise its constitutional “State Right” to counter the runaway federal government.  Encourage, no; demand that they exercise this right and become one of the two thirds States calling for and conducting a State’s Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution.

The “BALL” is in YOUR court!

 

7 thoughts on “Restoring the United States to a Constitutional Republic”

  1. Dennis my friend, I haven’t read Mark Levin’s book (so many that follow him probably will) but I’ve read recent articles on his book, and if Levin is rounding up the sheep to encourage an Article V Convention (con con), then Levin is no better than the tyrants running our country.

    I understand that government, at ALL levels, has strayed from the Founding Principles, but an Article V Convention has no promise of supporting Nature’s Law/ God’s Law if the current tyrants-in-charge participate in it. In Texas alone, our 83rd Legislature managed to pass seventeen 2nd Amendment bills (that I could find). NONE of these had any teeth that restored the right to self-defense. Instead they played with legalese or increased the availability of collection of fingerprints of more Texans (bigger government collecting more non-criminal data). The tyrants-in-charge in Austin are nothing but henchmen to the federal government; otherwise they would pass legislation that would nullify RobertsCare (aka Affordable Healthcare Act), all 2nd amendment infringements, all invasions of right-to-privacy, etc.

    Most of the strong 9th & 10th amendment bills in Austin died in committee (run by henchmen for the House Speaker and Lt. Governor) or sat in a calendar committee (run by henchmen), never to see the light of day on the floor of either the House or Senate for debate and vote.

    Answer these questions on a con con:
    1. Who will serve as delegates?
    2. How many delegates will there be?
    3. How will delegates be appointed or elected, and WHO will appoint or elect delegates?
    4. Will there be alternates?
    5. Will the number of delegates be apportioned according to each state’s population, or each state regardless of population will have the same voting strength?
    6. Could a con con be limited to one amendment or topic? If so, what will prevent 51% of delegates from rebelling against this provision and set out to create their own rules?
    7. Could a con con have the power to completely trash our current constitution and replace with a new one?
    8. Will adoption of any new proposed changes to our constitution require a majority agreement of the all delegates (or just those present) to the convention; or three-quarters of all delegates (or just those present); or 100% agreement of all delegates (or just those present)?
    9. What if the delegates from Texas disagree with any proposals? If they are the minority, then we’re stuck with what the majority rules (mob rule)? What if the majority wants to remove your right of self-defense? Is that something Texans should be saddled with?

    These are basic but very serious questions. The only guidance we have for an Article V convention is in our constitution and these are vague and unclear.

    The last time an Article V convention convened in our country was in 1787 in Philadelphia. Delegates from the 13 colonies were to meet and amend the Articles of Confederation (America’s previous central governing document) and the Articles of Confederation required 100% approval from the delegates before amendment could advance to 13 separate colonies for ratification. Guess what? The delegates to the 1787 convention trashed that little inconvenience, and changed the rules for ratification to only require three-quarters of the 13 colonies to be considered ratified. There were a couple of states that disagreed and did not vote to adopt readily. That was just too bad for them – huh?

    Look, what should make me think that another amendment will make the federal government start balancing the budget, stop spying on me, stop printing fiat currency, or better yet return to Article I Section 8 of the current Constitution and start performing the duties that the American People tasked them with in 1787? Every elected and appointed official in Texas is required to swear an Oath to the US and Texas Constitutions upon taking office. What makes you think that amending either of those documents will restore my liberty? Heck, they don’t follow those documents NOW. DC violates the Bill of Rights EVERY DAY. Austin isn’t nullifying any of what DC is doing either (equally inept).

    The problem with what ails America is the ignorance of the People and the lack of determination to DO something about tyranny. Electing the “right” people and expecting them to do my job of defending my freedom is only a fraction of the answer. The major problem with protecting my liberty is there are not enough People that even know what’s in that little document that will fit in your shirt pocket. In it you can find Article VI which states that if any law is made that contradicts anything in the constitution, that law is null and void. How many Americans KNOW what’s in that document so they can know when government violates their oath/agreement to keep government in check?

    That, my friend Dennis, is the problem and no con con or amendment will change this problem.
    Please consider NOT supporting a con con. Instead, keep doing what you did this year with the NTCL, and stay on top of what they’re doing to us in Austin, then tell everyone you know !!!

    1. Barbara – I don’t view this approach as a Con-con. When invoked under Article V of the Constitution the scope is limited to amending the Constitution, not re-writing the Constitution.

      When our legislators are only concerned with staying in office I don’t see them utilizing Article VI even if they know it is in the Constitution and what it really means. The few that buck the good ol’ boy system don’t stand a chance in changing the status qua.

      What has been tried heretofore has resulted in the chaos we have allowed ourselves to become. Perhaps holding a States Convention to amend the Constitution won’t get it done either; however, doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result definitely will perpetuate our enslavement to the tyrannical state.

      I will continue to do the things we have done this year through the NTCL. However, I think (if we can get 2/3rds of the states to band together) invoking Article V to bring the government back to a Republican form of governance is probably the only way we will be able to make it happen.

      Without bold steps the tyranny will become totally unbearable.

      1. The 1787 Philadelphia convention was assembled with instructions from those they represented to amend the Articles of Confederation, which at the time required 100% vote for approval. How did they manage to violate those rules?

        What prevents delegates to an Article V constitutional convention (con con) from creating their own rules? Where are the rules?

        1. Not having read the Articles of Confederation I don’t know if there is/was an equivalent item to Article V of the Constitution. From my understanding of the The Articles of Confederation, the confederation did not have a unifying entity at the national level; therefore, you may not be comparing apples to apples.

          I do agree, that an outcome is never known for sure. However, when this was attempted in the past it did not result in a rewriting of the constitution. When agreement was not reached it the convention appears to have just dissolved with no action having been taken.

          I tend to think that the rules will begin to come together once it looks like the several states have support to call a States Convention for the purpose of amending the Constitution.

  2. EXACTLY!
    GW Bush was right – the constitution is just a piece of paper… without the People’s enforcement. (which is why we find ourselves in this situation).
    So, let’s pick up that little book that fits in your front pocket, read it again and ask your local, county, state and federal officials to also read and study it.
    WHAT WILL AMERICA LOOK LIKE WHEN WE ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION ?

  3. I agree with reading and knowing our Constitution and asking others through out your state and throughout the country to do the same. Will it happen in large enough numbers to force the entrenched politicians to live to it? To nullify all of the unconstitutional laws and agencies they have created? Will those on the government dole support taking responsibility for their own livelihood? I think not.

    Doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome has proven over and over again that the same outcome occurs. Looking at the local groups of activists (tea party type groups) reveals that it is just the choir who show up to hear the message.

    I contend that the call for a States Constitutional Convention under Article V may be the only means left to right the ship of state and awaken the “gimme generation” to all of the rights they have been so willing to trade for not being responsible for their own welfare.

    Although the video makes some points, did you notice the speaker did not provide a plan of action for the people to become involved or a program compelling the people to take responsibility for ensuring the government follow the letter of the Constitution?

    Preaching to the choir is not going to do it. Preaching to city, county, and state government politicians is a valid avenue, but by the time they adhere to our clamor for responsible government the federal ship of state will be so far out to sea our only option will be to sink it with torpedoes.

Leave a Reply