ARE THERE OTHER RAMIFICATIONS WE HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AWARE OF?
Utah passed a resolution in the last session calling for a Balanced Budget. Is the current proposed call for an Article 5 Convention not redundant and a gross waste of time?
HJR 8 calls for imposing “fiscal restraints” on Congress. Congress has for many years sponsored and paid for a host of programs that are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution. By what stretch of any imagination will Congress comply with a new set of “restraints?”
The only way Congress can comply with the demand to balance the budget is to spend less by reducing expenditures or to finance their spending desires by borrowing money, creating it out of “thin air” (by way of The Federal Reserve, which it has been doing for years), or by increasing taxes. It seems obvious that spending more (not less) will win the day. Even Senator Neiderhauser has said that Utah would not agree to take less from the Federal Government. Which states would take less?
The U.S. Constitution is a set of prohibitions on Congress which have consistently been ignored for many years. It is illogical to assume that Congress will adhere to a new set of prohibitions. They will not.
Some want to “limit the terms of office” and seek to accomplish this by an amendment to the Constitution. Limiting the terms in office obviously depends on who you want there. Those you do not like you want out. Those you do like, you want in.
The best tool for limiting terms in office is an informed electorate. Those who do the “hiring” should do the “firing,” but this cannot be done unless you are watching what your “employee” is doing. We are getting what we deserve through our inattention.
It would seem that some who want to limit terms could set an example by resigning their own offices after a certain number of years in the Utah Legislature. They can and should show us how it ought to be done.
The states may very well call for a Convention, but Congress will set the terms, chose how the delegates would be selected and set the ground rules. The States would say, “Yes sir.” And how many delegates would Utah have. 6? And how many would California, New York, Texas, and some other heavily populated states have?
And finally, just as in the 1787 Convention where the delegates came with very specific instructions about what they were allowed to do and how many of the Thirteen Colonies had to approve anything, the delegates did what they wanted. They redid the entire document and changed the number of states required to ratify it. The rules would change.
It is a fairy tale that an Article V Convention could be controlled. We have forgotten that a Convention is a gathering of the sovereign. The people are sovereign and when they meet they will do what they want to do. Or, to be more precise, they will do what they are encouraged and pressured to do as they react to lengthy, ongoing, intense, and even threatening pressure from a large variety of sources who will be watching every move and every word.
Who would risk what we have for the unknown? There are some, apparently, but they ought to be ignored. Let us in Utah be wise and protect this invaluable document!