Meckler admits ‘Convention of States’ won’t solve the problem!

There may not be a question more difficult to answer for Mark Meckler, President of Citizens for Self-Governance and spokesman for its Convention of States Project (COS), than this:

Since the federal government ignores the Constitution as now written, why would it obey an amended Constitution?

This is a fair question, considering COS has spent several years and millions of dollars from undisclosed sources1 on paid lobbyists and “senior advisors” who crisscross the country leaning on legislators to pass resolutions asking Congress to call an Article V convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution, ostensibly to limit the federal government.

All the while, at the local level, COS has been carrying out a massive public relations campaign claiming to be a grassroots movement with a “solution as big as the problem.”

But Meckler’s group has a solution that has nothing to do with the problem! Since the problem is a federal government that has overreached its powers by ignoring our Constitution, logic alone tells us that amending our Constitution, the very document being ignored, can’t possibly fix the problem.

On July 6, 2017 (Part 2 at 37:00), Mark Meckler was heard on Red Eye Radioanswering that question in an interesting and illogical way:

    • A caller asked:

“Once the amendments are proposed and ratified, how are they actually implemented?”

    • In response, Meckler said,

“[The amendments] just automatically become part of the Constitution…part of the structure of governance in America…and that means that government then has to begin operating according to those amendments in the same way that they do with the rest of the Constitution.”

Meckler continued, “And functionally, ultimately that means government will shrink, they will have the authority to do less. And if they fail to follow those amendments, then obviously, there is litigation that ensues up to the federal courts and ultimately up to the Supreme Court, if necessary.” (emphasis added)

But wait! COS has contended for years that the Constitution needs to be amended precisely because of decisions by activist judges who have undermined the original intent of the Constitution and allowed the federal government to usurp powers not delegated by our Constitution.

In other words, Meckler gives us a circular argument. He’s saying that COS will add more verbiage to the Constitution to counter activist judges; and then, when the federal government ignores the new wording, as they have in the past, there will be lawsuits to force the government to follow the original intent of the framers. And lawsuits generate still more decisions by activist judges!

It should be noted, too, that our Constitution already limits the federal government to its enumerated powers; and any changes such as a Balanced Budget Amendmentwill expand the power of the federal government.

State governments already have the power to resist unconstitutional acts of the federal government – they simply need a backbone!

Another caller, only 10 minutes later, hit upon the circular argument and got a different response from Meckler:

    • Caller:

“What happens, if say, we call a “convention of states” [and] we get some great reform amendments made to the Constitution to undo a lot of damage that has been done by activist judges and left-wing congressional majorities and presidents. What happens if we have future…laws…that violate the new amendments…and…new activist judges on the Supreme Court that then give rubber stamp approval [to the unconstitutional laws]…. Is there a bullet-proof, really good way to stop the same process from cycling over and over again after we get new amendments [at a convention]?”

    • Meckler:

“You know, I think that’s one of the best questions there is. And I’m going to give you the short and blunt answer, which is NO!”

That’s right, Mark Meckler asserts there is no way to stop the federal government from ignoring amendments proposed by a convention that later become ratified! And the entire process places our current Constitution at risk – for what?!

    • Meckler elaborated philosophically:

“There is no way to prevent the cycle from happening because the cycle is the cycle of human nature. In our history, you can go back to the Roman Empire and look at what happens…. So I think what happens is, you correct course, you put the ship on course, and eventually it will begin to be blown off course.

“History tells us it takes about 100 years for amendments to stop being effective…I think, for example, the first amendment about 100 years ago started to come under assault. So, it had been in place for well over 100 years; so I expect the slide to happen.”

Let’s get this straight. The convention lobby is pouring massive resources into putting our Constitution at risk in a convention because Mark Meckler is trying to steer the ship back on course, somehow predicting that in 100 years our children’s descendants will need to go through the same process, subjecting our Constitution to risk once again (assuming it survives the second federal convention he is trying so hard to invoke). Why hasn’t he, his lobbyists, or his “senior advisors” brought thisup at legislative hearings?

Why not work on enforcing the Constitution we have, instead of rewriting 2,000 annotated pages of Supreme Court decisions, and very probably the entire Constitution? Why not encourage our State Legislators to stand up against and refuse to comply with unconstitutional federal dictates NOW – that’s what they are supposed to do, according to our Framers.

Article V was meant to correct DEFECTS in the Constitution, and this explains why it is not a solution for reining in an overreaching federal government.

If the main COS proponent thinks his “Solution” is a temporary “fix” and his method of implementing Amendments resulting from an Article V convention is no different than the system that created the problem in the first place, one must wonder…

What is the real reason COS is being bankrolled to advance an Article V convention whose Delegates, as direct Representatives of the People, would have the inherent right “to alter or to abolish” our “Form of Government”? (Declaration of Independence, paragraph 2.)


1 While we are unable to determine all the sources of the funding for Meckler’s group. The ultimate source of much of the funding for the push for an Article V convention is the mega billionaire Koch brothers of Texas.

© Judi Caler

Source: Meckler admits ‘Convention of States’ won’t solve the problem!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Meckler admits ‘Convention of States’ won’t solve the problem!


    The title belies the statements made by Mark Meckler. His statements are true and we know that Amendments work. changing conditions in the future may be required when the government oversteps it’s defined duties. Where in the constitution is the Fourth branch authorized to issue rules and regulations without any oversight?
    Today we have:

    Wars with no declaration of war.
    Laws created by executive order.
    Laws established by alphabet soup agencies.
    Laws created out of thin air by the courts.
    We are ruled by a people who, by virtue of their ability to con people out of their money (political donations) and their sole achievement of winning a popularity contest (election) and who as government functionaries sitting virtually untouchable and unaccountable in the corridors of power, have taken it upon themselves the “authority” to decide:

    What we can and cannot eat.
    What we can and cannot take for our health.
    What we can read.
    What we can say.
    Where we can and cannot say it.
    How much we can earn.
    How much they can take from what we earn.
    Who gets how much of what they take that we earn.
    How much and what we can own.
    How and where we can and cannot invest what we earn.
    How much of our money we can take out of the bank at one time.
    How much of our own money we can carry at any one time.
    How much of our money we can deposit at any one time.
    How much food costs.
    How much gas costs.
    How much insurance costs.
    What kind of insurance you can and cannot have.
    What type of health care you can receive.
    What health treatments you can receive.
    What we can buy and sell.
    Where we can buy and sell.
    Where we can go.
    What kind of light bulbs we can use.
    What kind of toilets we can use.
    How fast we can drive.
    How efficient our cars, appliances and houses must be.
    How safe our cars, appliances and houses must be.
    What we can teach our children.
    Where we cannot practice our faith.
    Whom we must serve.
    With whom we must share a bathroom.
    What we can grow on our property.
    What we can do with our property.
    What we can build on our property and how it must be built.
    What animals we can keep.
    What we can and cannot use for self-defense.
    What kind of ammunition we can purchase.
    Who gets to buy and sell our information.
    They believe – with no evidence to back it up and much evidence to the contrary — that by virtue of their ability to con people out of their money and win popularity contests, or because they have risen to positions of authority in the federal bureaucracy, that they are imminently more intelligent than us and better able to look out for us than we are for ourselves, though they rarely state this belief publicly. This despite the fact that among their ranks are pedophiles, adulterers, pornography addicts, sexual abusers, tax cheats, check kiters, drug abusers, extortioners, racketeers, money launderers, embezzlers, serial liars, perjurers, bribers and bribe takers.


    • topcat1957 says:

      Tony you’ve done an excellent job detailing the many unconstitutional abuses committed by those in government and those appointed to unconstitutional agencies. Lawmakers have unconstitutionally delegated their lawmaking authority to unelected bureaucrats in order to distance themselves from responsibility for the unpopular and unconstitutional ‘laws’ created by these bureaucrats. Similarly judges legislate. Attorneys are even taught that Supreme Court decisions create new law! All those things you’ve mentioned are unconstitutional and must be addressed.
      However a COS is the most dangerous idea for addressing those issues. Nullification of unconstitutional laws is the method for addressing such abuses supported by the founding fathers. They advised against an Article V convention because of the potential for completely rewriting the Constitution. Amendments can be made without endangering the entire document through the regular amendment process. A COS was held once before to amend the Articles of Confederation and that time the delegates created an entirely new document, which is our current Constitution of the US. Because of the plenipotentiary power referenced in the Declaration the delegates at a COS cannot be restricted as to what changes they would make; legally they could trash our current Constitution and create a whole new one. Considering the cultural currents in our society today, how could we prevent delegates from inserting socialist ideas into the new constitution? How could we ensure that delegates would be devoted to liberty, to the ideals of the founding fathers? How could we be sure that a delegate would not push for social justice warrior ideas to be put into the new document, or legalize most or all of the present abuses committed by our federal government? How could we prevent the deep state from taking over the convention through its various methods? In short, how could we prevent the very men responsible for the unconstitutional, immoral, criminal, and treasonous conditions we so rightly oppose becoming delegates themselves and legalizing much of their current abuses? The founding fathers were quite learned men who had studied various forms of government for many years and had lived under the dictatorial rule of a King for decades. They were committed to liberty as none of our current crop of politicians are.
      A COS endangers all of their work. The problems you listed are indeed quite real. But the solution must not be attempted through a COS. Our current problem is largely one of enforcing our existing Constitution, nullifying the unconstitutional laws created by unauthorized bodies or by our federal government itself. It will be a fight to return this country to the rule of law. Given our current situation it could possibly result in massive civil unrest and violence supported and/or committed by the SJW, Antifa, and brazenly socialist elements in society and within government. Attempts to return us to constitutional government in the past have been met with extreme violence. JFK briefly returned the country to constitutionally created money, i.e. when he had the Treasury create United States Notes and stopped the Federal Reserve banking cartel from creating our money and charging us billions in interest every year to do so. A few months later he was assassinated.
      So it won’t be easy to fight for the rule of constitutional governance and law. But that we must do. The answer is primarily one of enforcing the Constitution, not making a new one. Even if we could somehow make a better Constitution than our current one, what would prevent the deep state and the current cast of bad actors from continuing to ignore and flout the new one?
      We the people dedicated to the ideals of the founding fathers must fight, must nullify unconstitutional laws, elect good people, elect and appoint honest judges, and root out the corrupt, immoral, and criminal elements currently plaguing us.

      What they are doing is already illegal. When someone is speeding the answer is not to put up another speed limit sign but to arrest the speeder. Unfortunately the people have slept walked through the past century and allowed the Constitution to be ignored and flouted. We are living with the consequences of our collective ignorance and tolerance of long standing abuses of power.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s