An unkind thing to unleash on the unwitting, Pirsig hastened to add. So I’ll try to be brief, at least for me.

My first thought is that if a CC were to happen, it could conceivably be a TOTAL F&*%KING nightmare. MY personal worry is that we might, armed with our modern egos, “education,” and selfishness unmake something that could not be re-made in this modern era.

The US was formed as a republic wherein wealthy landowners agreed on a framework to govern an overwhelmingly uneducated and uninformed populace, in an environment where even the tiniest bits of information took weeks and months to travel even to the next hill or town, let alone state. We’ve come a few galaxies since then, no?

Pleas notice that since then, those founding compromises have governed us astonishingly well, speaking comparatively. Far better than most other nations, in other words. Could America, in the 21st century, in the face of a singular challenge to its economical viability, open the floor to the reformation of every bit we’ve established in over 200 years, and survive?

I don’t want to know. I don’t want to open Pandora’s box unless we have a belt, suspenders, and diapers security plan to guarantee we will get the lid back on.

The 1787 convention was not intended to replace the AoC and, at the time, wasn’t called the Constitutional Convention either. The idea of calling a new convention a “Constitutional Convention” is generally accepted.

Article V of the Constitution (the full text):

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, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no

You say:

Thus, even if a convention dis propose a new constitution, it would have to become part of the original document with that document left intact.

The Constitution can be completely reworked and still left “intact” if future amendments render certain parts moot. See the 3/5 compromise and section 2 of the 14th amendment.

If someone proposes the following amendment at a new convention and the states ratify it:

“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a guy named Bob from Detroit, who we like a lot and has some good ideas.”

Then Article I Section I will still be in the document, but the document will have significantly changed.

The fact is the states have applied for a convention. Congress refuses to obey the Constitution and call it as required. All 50 states have submitted 750 applications for a convention call.

This seems disingenuous to me. These 750 applications are spread out over the past 200 years and address multiple concerns. The closest we’ve come to 2/3 of states applying for a single concern at the same time is in 1983 for the Balanced Budget Convention.

The language of Article V is clear and obvious if it is read fully. The purpose of the convention is to “propose amendments”, not write a new Constitution. Further, any amendments must become “part of this Constitution” meaning, obviously, the amendment becomes part of the present Constitution, not the Constitution becomes part of the amendment. Thus, even if a convention dis propose a new constitution, it would have to become part of the original document with that document left intact.

The fact is the states have applied for a convention. Congress refuses to obey the Constitution and call it as required. All 50 states have submitted 750 applications for a convention call. The applications can be read at http://www.foavc.org.

Article V of the constitution clearly says we can do it but only tells us how to initiate it. I would imagine once 2/3 of the states call for the convention we’d be on our own to figure out the delegate election process.

many of today’s politicians unfortunately aren’t independent (and some even intelligent) enough

there would be an uproar if lawyers and philosophers and educators were behind it like the original founding fathers.

I agree with you on the first point. If it were up to me, I would send all federal politicians for a trip on the B-Ark. But I think a lot of people would feel this way and we’d see mostly state politicians (or personalities) headed to Philly or Vegas or whatever location was chosen for this “historic event”.

Politicians already have the mechanisms in place to win elections, but lawyers, philosophers and educators have some tools at their disposal. A lawyer could post his “application” on youtube and go viral. Soon the whole state is talking. The whole country would be talking about the convention already, even Michael Jackson’s death couldn’t pry this from jaws of CNN.

I imagine South Carolina and Texas would send at least one reverend each to protect us from the gays. Massachusetts and California would send a couple of gays to protect us against the Christians. We’d be able to keep slavery out of it this time but I’m sure there would be something in there to regret 200 years from now.

We’d probably end up regretting how the whole thing went to pot and fractured the union.

But! In order for it to work, there would have to be compromise. And compromise starts with civility and all that other stuff I think the Donk does so well … except Jimmy and Michael. Good lord.