re: Would you support a convention of states?

quote:

---

Would you support a Convention of States under Artile V of the Constitution? If so, what things would you want the convention of states to enact as law?

---

We already have the best government yet devised by men.

quote:

---

Our founding fathers were very bright, but they obviously didn't see the harm lobbyists would do.

---

They did realize the deleterious effects of faction, which is sort of the same thing.

Federalist No. 10

Federalist No. 10 (Federalist Number 10) is an essay written by James Madison as the tenth of The Federalist Papers, a series of essays initiated by Alexander Hamilton arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. Published on November 29, 1787 under the pseudonym "Publius", Federalist No. 10 is among the most highly regarded of all American political writings.[1]

No. 10 addresses the question of how to guard against "factions", or groups of citizens, with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the whole community. Madison saw factions as inevitable due to the nature of man - that is, as long as men hold differing opinions, have differing amounts of wealth, and own differing amount of property, they will continue to form alliances with people who are most similar to them, and they will sometimes work against the public interest, and infringe upon the rights of others. Thus, he questions how to guard against those dangers."

Federalist No. 10 continues a theme begun in Federalist No. 9; it is titled, "The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection". The whole series is cited by scholars and jurists[who?] as an authoritative interpretation and explication of the meaning of the Constitution. Jurists[who?] have frequently read No. 10 to mean that the Founding Fathers did not intend the United States government to be partisan[citation needed] and others[who?] have argued that given Madison's clear understanding that partisanship is inevitable, he suggests that a representative republic form of government is more effective against factions than a direct democracy.[citation needed] Thus, Madison saw the Constitution as forming a "happy combination" of a republic and a democracy and with "the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures" the power would not be centralized in a way that would make it "more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried."

LINK

[quote]Long as the PC crazies and anarchist progressives have no real voice. Yes. [/quote]

THIS

quote:

---

We already have the best government yet devised by men.

And those men knew that that the best government must have the ability to adapt to changing conditions.

---

That is why the language is so brilliant. After all the details were hashed out, Gouverneur Morris actually drafted the language we see today. He also wrote the Preamble.



Gouverneur Morris was one of the few delegates at the Philadelphia Convention who spoke openly against domestic slavery. According to James Madison, who took notes at the Convention, Morris spoke openly against slavery on August 8, 1787, saying that it was incongruous to say that a slave was both a man and property at the same time:

He [Morris] never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of heaven on the states where it prevailed. Compare the free regions of the Middle States, where a rich & noble cultivation marks the prosperity & happiness of the people, with the misery & poverty which overspread the barren wastes of Va. Maryd. & the other States having slaves. ... Proceed southwardly, and every step you take, through the great regions of slaves, presents a desert increasing with the increasing proportion of these wretched beings.

Upon what principle is it that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are they men? Then make them citizens, and let them vote. Are they property? Why, then, is no other property included? The Houses in this city [Philadelphia] are worth more than all the wretched slaves which cover the rice swamps of South Carolina.

According to Madison, Morris felt that the U.S. Constitution's purpose was to protect the rights of humanity, and that to promote slavery was incongruous with it:

The admission of slaves into the Representation when fairly explained comes to this: that the inhabitant of Georgia and S. C. who goes to the Coast of Africa, and in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity tears away his fellow creatures from their dearest connections & damns them to the most cruel bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the Citizen of Pa. or N. Jersey who views with a laudable horror, so nefarious a practice.[12]"[12]

LINK

Pretty good guy.

quote:

---

50 yrs ago here, I am with you

---

37 and counting baw.

LOL at the folks on here who think Art V convention means scrapping it and rewriting the whole thing.

Yes but not open ended. That would be a mess.

quote:

---

Ok so let's bitch and moan and accuse one side of trying to change the constitution while we try to change the constitution?

---

You're seriously equating this two things?

You can't bet that stupid.....

quote:

---

Would you support a convention of states?

---

Yes and I think terms limits for Congressmen and Judges is are good reasons for a Constitutional Convention. None of these positions should become professional politicians which is the case today.