Title: Correcting False Claims
Original CoS Document (slug): correcting-false-claims
Login Required to view? No
Attached File: Truth_vs_Fiction_Correcting_False_Claims.pdf
Created: 2019-03-13 14:17:38
Updated: 2020-03-13 23:00:00
Published: 2019-03-13 14:17:44
Converted: 2025-04-14T19:34:14.108468944
Truth vs. Fiction:
Correcting False COS Claims
False Claim: An Article V convention is a ‘Constitutional Convention;’ in other words a ‘Con-Con.’
Truth: This is No Con. It’s an ‘amendments convention.’ It is wrong to imply an Article V convention
held today would mirror the 1787 Philadelphia convention that produced the U.S. Constitution. The
states that gathered then had individual supreme political powers. They were not bound to any Articles
of Confederation procedures or guidelines for proposing amendments. Today, an Article V convention
has limits, which are rooted in Article V of the U.S. Constitution. An Article V convention is limited to
only proposing amendments to the existing Constitution. (For further information, a comprehensive article by
Michael Farris was published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy and refutes the idea that the 1787 Constitutional
Convention was a “runaway” convention.)
False Claim: Convention commissioners could rewrite the entire Constitution.
Truth: No rewrite; only proposed amendments. The goal of the Convention of States Project is firm,
holding an Article V convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution – amendments that
address three pressing concerns – curbing the federal debt, limiting federal government power and
jurisdiction, and imposing term limits on the judiciary, federal bureaucrats and elected officials. The
convention is limited to this purpose and state legislatures provide specific instructions to their
commissioners to adhere to this restriction. Appropriate amendments could include a balanced budget
amendment and term limits on Congress and federal judges. (See the Missouri Article V Resolution (SCR4).
False Claim: Holding an Article V convention is unprecedented.
Truth: Clear precedent has been established. Since 1787, 33 interstate conventions have been held in
the United States – each with a specified topic or meeting agenda. Thus, there’s a clear standard for
how these meetings work. At interstate conventions, voting always is done as individual states – each
has one vote, regardless of population or number of delegates in attendance. That’s why it’s a
convention of states – not a convention of delegates.
False Claim: Only Congress has the authority to amend the Constitution.
Truth: Article V of the U.S Constitution states: “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses
shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the
legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, 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. . .”
False Claim: The Article V convention process has no safeguards. It won’t protect our Constitution
from rogue delegates or special interest groups.
Truth: Significant process safeguards exist to prevent corruption. They include:
1) The Limited Scope of an Amendments Convention
The scope of authority for the convention is defined by the topic specified in the 34 applications that
trigger the convention. Any proposals beyond that scope would be out of order.
2) Restrictions on Commissioner Authority
Convention commissioners are the agents of their state legislature and are subject to the instructions
given by their state legislature. The state legislature can recall commissioners who attempt to exceed
their authority, and actions taken outside the scope of a commissioner's authority would be void.
If state legislatures failed to stop commissioners from acting beyond their powers AND if a majority
of the state delegations voted to propose an ultra vires amendment, AND if Congress nevertheless
sent that amendment to the states for ratification, the courts could declare the action void.
3) State Voting Requirements –
It is a requirement that 38 states ratify any amendment proposed by the convention while only 13
states are needed to block any ill-conceived or illegitimately advocated proposal. The convention
cannot change the method of ratification. Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that an
Article V amendments convention is empowered by the U.S. Constitution and subject to its rules.