I think in order for Congress to consider an amendment to the constitution, 3/4 of the legislatures of every state have to call for the amendment and then 2/3 of both houses have to approve it.   I don't know of any issue where 3/4 of the states called for a particular amendment..is there one or more that Congress ignored?  I don't believe the people could actually call for an amendment, but I could be wrong in that it might be possible to place a proposed amendment on the ballot that would force your state legislature to be included in the list of states calling for an amendment...so people would be just voting to have an amendment considered and the people in 3/4 of the states would have to vote for it, and then the Congress would have to consider it and considering it is about their empires, getting 2/3 of them to agree would be next to impossible.

The only way to fix this is just to vote the fossils out.  SCREAM HIGH AND LOW..this is our country, we are the people and we are not going to take any more non-representation by a bunch of fossils who have forgotten who sent them there until they are up for reelection and once again promise the moon just to get back to their empire!

We need a national campaign to get rid of anyone who has been in Congress for more than say 3 terms or even 2 would be better.  Goodbye John Murtha.  Goodbye Arlen Specter.  Goodbye Harry Reid.  GOODBYE Ted Kennedy.  etc., etc., etc.

SoldiersMum wrote:I think in order for Congress to consider an amendment to the constitution, 3/4 of the legislatures of every state have to call for the amendment and then 2/3 of both houses have to approve it.   I don't know of any issue where 3/4 of the states called for a particular amendment..is there one or more that Congress ignored?  I don't believe the people could actually call for an amendment, but I could be wrong in that it might be possible to place a proposed amendment on the ballot that would force your state legislature to be included in the list of states calling for an amendment...so people would be just voting to have an amendment considered and the people in 3/4 of the states would have to vote for it, and then the Congress would have to consider it and considering it is about their empires, getting 2/3 of them to agree would be next to impossible.

The only way to fix this is just to vote the fossils out.  SCREAM HIGH AND LOW..this is our country, we are the people and we are not going to take any more non-representation by a bunch of fossils who have forgotten who sent them there until they are up for reelection and once again promise the moon just to get back to their empire!

We need a national campaign to get rid of anyone who has been in Congress for more than say 3 terms or even 2 would be better.  Goodbye John Murtha.  Goodbye Arlen Specter.  Goodbye Harry Reid.  GOODBYE Ted Kennedy.  etc., etc., etc.

Unfortunately, Article Five is pretty vague.  My interpretation of it does not require any specificity regarding an approved agenda before the Constitutional Convention can be called......merely the desire of 2/3 of the states to hold a Convention.  The agenda for such a Convention would be established by the delegates after the Convention was called to order, i.e., the agenda need not be determined a priori.   IMO Congress is required, by use of the word shall,  to call the Convention without regard to, or certification of, the issues to be addressed.  Any number of issues could be voted on at any given Convention, and if passed by majority vote, those issues would go forward as proposed amendments to our Constitution, requiring 3/4 of the state legislatures to ratify them.  If ratified by the states they would have full force and effect as amendments to our Constitution.....irrespective of Congressional action or approval.

Now that's a tall order, but I think a national movement, with separate elements in each state, expressing the hot issues of local/regional constituencies, could force the state legislatures to act.  I bet the border states would love to push a vote on immigration enforcement, how about pro-life issues in the southern states.  I'll bet that every state would be in favor of Congressional term limits too....well maybe not Massachusetts.  State legislatures would be hard-pressed to ignore the citizenry on these hot button issues.