It sets up an interstate compact to use YOUR taxes to force a Constitutional Convention that will raise Federal taxes 40%!!!
+ Hi–Blast needed on Michigan’s SB306 (again!)…it’ll be up for a vote this time…This is a bill to bind Michigan to an interstate compact to pay a staff to force other states to option in on a constitution convention supposedly to pass a Federal Balanced Budget Amendment. There are many problems.
FIRST, there is no guarantee a ConCon will be limited to one issue, or that it will be bound by the ratification. More than 600 times it has been tried and each time dropped when folks realized the risk. Sec. of State Thomas Jefferson pursued it in 1796 and when the Jay Supreme refused the opine that such a convention could be limited to one issue. James Madison was alarmed when two states were calling for and Art V ConCon just a year after the Constitution was ratified. It dawned on him that this provision slipped through and was very dangerous. If a ConCon was too dangerous when Washington was President, John Adams VP, Hamilton and Jefferson in the Cabinet, Madison in the Senate and Jay on the Court, how much more dangerous would it be now with an electorate that chose Obama twice, and a political class that puts in congressional leadership people like Pelosi and Reid and Republican capitulators like McConnell and Boehner/Ryan? It is WAAAY too risky. The Constitution needs to enforced not gutted
SECOND, this compact allows Governors to name the delegates and binds that the delegate from first state to ratify (South Carolina) will chair the ConCon. It seeks to bind states and the Congress in ways contrary to the Constitution and Art. V and sets other criteria that will not stand up to current Constitutional authorities. Under Article V states petition but Congress calls a convention and will set criteria. The same Congress that will not limit spending.
THIRD, the States get a huge amount of money from the Feds. Michigan The Compact has Governors appoint delegates;
Michigan gets more than 40% of its budget from the Federal Government. “Free” Federal money has swayed THIS governor several times. Are we to believe THIS governor would appoint delegates that would cut that flow of money? Cut the budget after he has blown out Michigan’s budget? The alternative would be a 40% tax increase.
FOURTH, a balanced Federal Budget Amendment without a Tax Limitation Amendment will guarantee at least a 40% increase in Federal Taxes!!! This bill, if passed, seeks to assure there will not be a tax limitation amendment to limit tax increases. Congress did not even uphold a 2% +/- sequestration. They do not have the stomach to hold the line on taxes and spending. Defaults and guarantees in Federal Spending and entitlements continue to demand spending increases. Total annual spending will increase by $2.3 trillion in nominal terms, growing from $3.5 trillion in 2014 to $5.8 trillion in 2024.
- In 2014, spending on defense is 3.5 percent of GDP, or less than half of what it was in 1965, and falling, while mandatory spending (including net interest) is reaching 14.3 percent of GDP and growing.
- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid make up 77 percent, or more than three-fourths, of mandatory program spending in 2014 and have no budget limits.
- Discretionary spending, the part of the budget that Congress budgets each year, will increase by 29 percent over 10 years, but only if lawmakers enforce sequestration.
- Discretionary spending as a share of the budget will fall from two-thirds in 1964 to less than one-quarter in 2024, as entitlements grow uncontrolled.
Mandatory spending will grow from one-quarter of the budget in 1965 to 63 percent by 2024. When net interest is added, this spending would consume three-fourths of the budget. Below is the notice for the committee hearing Wednesday December 2nd. Please make sure the committee clerk gets your ‘written testimony’ soon and write to the 9 committee members.
FIFTH, a ConCon is a dream for those who would fundamentally change America. The chances of Obama/Reid/Pelosi/Ryan cabal having control over such a convention, and the high risk of a run-away, should give any responsible legislator a high fear of this move.
A Convention cannot be Limited. Those who hold on the hope that 3/4ths of the states must ratify cannot assure that. the last Convention changed the rules from 100% to 75%. The next Convention might change it to 2/3rds or 51%.
Within the ranks of those clamoring for an Article V convention are found numerous extremely radical, progressive, and socialist organizations that otherwise would have little in common with the conservatives fighting on the same side. George Soros — the financier of global fascism — is pumping millions of dollars into the same Article V campaign that is being promoted by Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and other popular conservative spokesmen. There is no such Constitutional provision for a so-called Convention Of States. That proposal is also perking through the legislature. http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17402-socialists-and-soros-fight-for-article-v-convention
Why do we think that the Congress that ignores the Constitution, and a President who sees the three branches of government as he, his pen and his phone, would be any more likely to abide by a new amendment to the Constitution?
Thomas Jefferson wrote to Wilson C. Nicholas (Sept. 7, 1803) “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”
James Madison, author of the Constitution and co-author of the Federalist Papers was horrified to learn in 1788, just months after ratification of the Constitution, that New York and Virginia sought an Article V Convention. Madison wrote G.L. Turberville on November 2, 1788: If a General Convention were to take place for the avowed and sole purpose of revising the Constitution, it would naturally consider itself as having a greater latitude than the Congress…It would consequently give greater agitation to the public mind; an election into it would be courted by the most violent partisans on both sides… (and) would no doubt contain individuals of insidious views, who, under the mask of seeking alterations popular in some parts … might have the dangerous opportunity of sapping the very foundations of the fabric…. Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers, which assembled under every propitious circumstance, I should tremble for the result of a second, meeting in the present temper in America.”
Former Chief Justice Warren Burger stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could mike its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…”
As the late Constitutional scholar and Democrat Sen. Sam Ervin once told us: “There are no rules to direct what is brought forth during a ConCon. Anything and everything goes!”.
IT IS WAAY TOO RISKY! Yes, we want change and Congress cannot control itself. Why? Because we do not demand it. We keep electing incumbents who bust the budget to raise funds for their campaigns and donors. It is corrupt. How do we change that? We change public opinions that will demand discipline; we elect a President who will end this lunacy. We not risk the few protections we have by opening the Constitution for every special interests and awaiting substitutes that will forever destroy the once great USA!
++ SB306 (CFA) was heard on 11/4/15 in the same committee, and no vote was taken. Nick Dranias was there to testify (CFA – the sponsor for) and Rachel Richards (Michigan League for Public Policy – against). You can view their testimony at the committee website by clicking on “open testimony” and then selecting their testimony: http://house.michigan.gov/MHRPublic/CommitteeInfo.aspx?comkey=332 You can also view the minutes of 11/4 right under ‘open testimony’ and see there were a few others there also.
I was told by the committee clerk, Malika, that written testimony will be accepted when the item goes on the agenda–so that is now! So you can write to Malika and ask that your letters be submitted as written testimony and be distributed to members. She’ll only distribute it if she has time, so please write to all committee members also. Malika is supposed to put written testimony on the website –just like with Dranias and Richards. Malika’s address: email@example.com
SB306 is Compact for America’s BBA. If it passes this house committee, it should have only the House Floor to go. So it is really important to defeat it now. Attached are the committee members to write to, phone #s, parties.
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 11:16:11 -0500
Subject: [FINL] STANDARD: House Financial Liability Reform Standing Committee Meeting
Standing Committee Meeting Financial Liability Reform, Rep. Pat Somerville, Chair
DATE: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 TIME: 11:45 AM
PLACE: Room 327, House Office Building, Lansing, MI
SB 306 (Sen. Green) Legislature; other; compact for a balanced budget; enact.
OR ANY BUSINESS PROPERLY BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE
To view text of legislation go to:
Committee Clerk: Malika Abdul-Basir Phone: 517-373-7256 e-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Individuals needing special accommodations to participate in the meeting may contact the Chair’s office.
Schedule changes or cancellations available at http://www.house.mi.gov/publiccommitteeschedule/ Committee members:
Michigan House Financial Liability Reform Committee (SB306) – Compact for America (CFA BBA)
Representative Pat Somerville, Committee Chair PatSomerville@house.mi.gov (517) 373-0855 R
Representative Eric Leutheuser, Majority Vice-Chair EricLeutheuser@house.mi.gov (517) 373-1794 R
Representative Jeff Farrington JeffFarrington@house.mi.gov (517) 373-7768 R
Representative Andrea LaFontaine AndreaLaFontaine@house.mi.gov (517) 373-8931 R
Representative Lisa Lyons LisaLyons@house.mi.gov (517) 373-0846 R
Representative Earl Poleski EarlPoleski@house.mi.gov (517) 373-1795 R
Representative Robert Wittenberg, Minority Vice-Chair RobertWittenberg@house.mi.gov (517) 373-0478 D
Representative Wendell Byrd WendellByrd@house.mi.gov (517) 373-0144 D
Representative John Chirkun JohnChirkun@house.mi.gov (517) 373-0854 D
Matt Muxlow@house.mi.gov (Somerville) I’d copy this staffer of Somerville’s to make sure it gets there.
Matt Schoech had an issue with the comment field. He emailed me this:
DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!
I agree Matt a con-con is so unbelievably dangerous especially in this climate of thought that the public is stupid. Balance budge my butt!!!!! It's guise for gun control, free speech, etc. Once a Con-con is called, it's not limited and herein lies the danger.
I also think delegates should be elected not appointed.
This report is bogus, just like the others. There is no "con-con" except the one that's been going on since oh, Wilson was president, and we, the People, have had no say in it. If you think what is going on now is acceptable, then stick with your "danger, Will Robertson, Danger, Will Robinson." See where that gets this country. Of course, there's always nullification. That'll work--NOT. A little mental exercise will demonstrate that to you. What I mean by mental exercise is thinking. How is it that one or two or even a dozen states nullifying all the crap the federal government has done will get us back to the Constitution as written? Tell me.
As for me, I am a volunteer with Convention of States (notice it's not a Constitutional Convention). When we get the requisite 34 state applications, a convention of states will be called by Congress. Congress will set a time and place. After that, Congress is out of the picture. I have more factual information for you if you would be so bold to read it. Contact me at email@example.com. for more info.
Rhonda--any con-con by any means is DANGER! I live the Constitution have studied the Constitution and quite honestly--fight any infraction no matter what because a waiver of anything is chilling my Constitutional rights. Just exactly what part of the Constitution needs to be amended, changed, altered, fixed? Please advise.
I'd say we need to clarify the Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause, the 14th Amendment (which has been liberally over interpreted by the SCOTUS), Dump the 16th and 17th Amendments, and incorporate the REAINS Act to give the legislature limited oversight on the big regs the "4th" branch of government proposes to impose. Also, impose term limits on all federal offices. Questions?
Well said, Rhonda. I'm a volunteer for Convention of States Project as well, and was before there was a Convention of States Project. In my area, the bulk of the resistance comes from The John Birch Society, and Eagle Forum. While they have some "feel good" family stuff, they have no business messing with extra-family issues like those discussed here. We'll get there - trust me.
Rhonda there is no Constitutional provision for a so=called COS. It is fiction. A lure for you to take the "easy" way out and risk what few protections we have. If Congress and the president ignores this Constitution what makes you think they would obey a new one? As Abe Lincoln and Milton Friedman said, we change public policy by changing public opinion. Until we change public opinion we would be throwing what little lifeline we have left to gut or replace the only existing authority we have to hold them accountable. Most of the money funding the Art/ V movement is coming from the far left. Don't jump out of the pan into the fire.
This article is completely false. Read our FAQ for what the bill will really accomplish: http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!faq/xv6u2
SB306 commits the states to advancing, proposing and ratifying a specific federal Balanced Budget Amendment you can read in advance through a 24 hour convention.
SB306 limits debt and taxes. Read the FAQ here to see the proof: http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!faq/xv6u2
SB306 creates a voluntarily-funded commission that has the job of uniting the states in the effort to advance and ratify a federal balanced budget amendment.
The quote from James Madison was specifically in reference to an effort to organize a convention to address nearly 2 dozen topics. It has nothing to do with SB306, which is an agreement among the states to advance, propose and ratify solely a federal Balanced Budget Amendment. Every Founder from George Washington to James Madison said that the states should and could target an Article V convention to specific amendments, preferably only one or a few--not two dozen. You can see the proof here: http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!faq/xv6u2
Chief Justice Burger's opinion does not speak to the ability of an agreement among the states to target an Article V convention and, in any event, is contrary to that of Justice Antonin Scalia, which you can read here: http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!faq/xv6u2
Don't be misled by falsehood, read our FAQ for the actual facts. http://www.compactforamerica.org/#!faq/xv6u2
What is false? Only Dranias. Does he have a problem with the truths: That the Committee was going to meet? The names and contact information of the Committee? That Dranias testified 11/4/15? (wait until I have time to report on that! Among other things he states the Compact does not have a specific Amendment; the States are being asked to support a pig-in-a-poke and approve it in a 24 hour period). Is he challenging the quotes from Madison, Jefferson, Chief justice Burger and Sen. Sam Ervin that such a ConCon cannot be limited? My personal observation of confirmation from the Library of Congress as to the Jefferson response, and the Supreme Court declining to limit such a ConCon? Mr. Dranias is patently untrue and hardly unbiased in his misleading statements, continually trying to direct folks to his deceitful misrepresentations. He is paid (who is really funding it?) to work full time and travel around the country to push a ConCon and his Compact will make the states - we the taxpayers - pay for his political agenda. It is the epitome of self interest and using governments for personal purposes.