On this Flag Day, I confess that I support Article V Convention of States, and could care less if it's a "runaway convention!" For those who are unfamiliar, Article V of the U.S. Constitution reads:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem 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 thereof, as one or the other Mode of Ratification may proposed by the Congress; Provided no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article, and that no State, without consent of Congress, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
So there are two constitutional ways amendments can be proposed: the Congressional method, which is how the first 27 amendments became part of the Constitution. The other method, which has never been done, is where 2/3rds (34) of the states pass resolutions agreeing to participate in an Amendments Convention, where each state sends a delegate. Any proposed amendments would have to be ratified by 3/4ths (38) of the states, just like the Congressional method. (As of this post 12 states have passed Article V.)
The Left obviously opposes the Constitutional Government, so they could care less about Article V. Some conservative groups, such as Concerned Women of America, the John Birch Society (which some SSPX priests are members of), and Eagle Forum (which has gone unhinged since Phyllis Schlafly passed away last year) over the fear of the "Runaway Convention." The Convention of States Project, who is behind the legislative process in the states, believes it's impossible since if all 34 resolutions include the same certain topics, the Convention must deal with the topics approved by the states and nothing else?
The topics focused on by the Convention of States Project are Limited Federal Power, term limits, and fiscal discipline. These topics need to be discussed, no doubt. But I am disappointed that other topics on restoring our moral values will likely won't be discussed, so I could care less if Article V is a runaway convention! If 38 states must ratify proposals anyhow, the Convention wouldn't hurt.
What about American essentials being Constitutionalized, such as the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem, the Flag, English as the official language, etc.? With no language currently in the Constitution about these, a future Supreme Court could put them at-risk (and ruin America permanently).
What about amendments overturning Roe v. Wade and defining civil marriage as heterosexual? What about banning men from using the ladies room? With the current makeup of Congress the marriage amendment would've passed 15-20 years ago but not today! Even if the GOP ends up with 67 Senators in 2018 they still won't passes these amendments because of John McCain's girlfriend Lindsey Graham, who would vote against it.
I know Mark Levin proposed in his Liberty Amendments an amendment that would allow state legislatures to propose amendments to the Constitution. Is there the social issue amendments are to be proposed?
Technically, any amendment proposal is allowed except two U.S. Senators from each state. They could propose abolishing everything, which won't fly.
Also, Article V itself doesn't specify that only certain topics must be discussed. It's quite possible that pro-life groups could challenge the constitutionality of limiting certain topics, where the Supreme Court would have immediate jurisdiction. (See. Article III, Sec.2, Cl. 2)
Article V is the only peaceful way the United States of America is going to be saved. Otherwise, be prepared for another Civil War.