re: Would you support a convention of states?

A convention of the states is a terrible and dangerous idea. Look at history: we've had one of these in 1787. IT was officially called to do one thing (revise portions of the Articles of Confederation) and it went so much further than its call in creating a whole new system of government. And that was with many outstanding leaders/thinkers as delegates.

Who would be the delegates this time? How would they be chosen? How many would each state get? I shudder to think of the complete lunatics that states like Louisiana and Texas and Oklahoma (much less Vermont or Maryland) might send to such a meeting. I simply do not trust the typical leaders we have now, on the Left or Right, to have the power to create a completely new system of government.

And should we rely on our state legislatures as a check on such a Convention? I think not. As corrupt as Congress is, most state legislatures are twice as corrupt and under the control of vested interests.

I am a liberal Democrat and I favor term limits. Why couldn't we focus a movement on getting Congress to pass an amendment to get that done? If we'd focus on one thing that has widespread support we might get it passed. 2 terms for US Senators and 4 terms for US Reps would be enough for me.