To view this on the COS website, click here is-fear-of-the-unlikely-preventing-the-necessary

Is Fear of the Unlikely Preventing the Necessary?

Uncle Sam is dying because the men who wrote the Constitution 237 years ago, didn’t anticipate the ways in which checks and balances could be subverted in the 21st century.

It’s a glorious May evening in Idaho, which my cousin – Mr. Birch – and I are enjoying with an evening stroll around the neighborhood. But our celebration of being free men in a free country is interrupted when we happen upon our beloved uncle. He’s lying unconscious in the street, still in his star-spangled top hat.

I drop to my knees next to him and check for a pulse. Nothing. I place my hands on his chest to begin compressions when John shouts, “Stop! You could break a rib.” How do I respond?

- “Thank God you stopped me. I didn’t think of that. Let’s go make funeral arrangements.” or
- “No. I MIGHT break a rib, but he IS going to die if we don’t try this.”

Our national debt is approaching $37,000,000,000,000 and is still climbing. District judges are nullifying the results of the last election. Those we elect to represent us, instead become wealthy by excusing themselves from the laws they impose on us.

Uncle Sam is dying because the men who wrote the Constitution 237 years ago, didn’t anticipate the ways in which checks and balances could be subverted in the 21st century. But they were wise men indeed, and understood that the world would change in ways they couldn’t foresee. Hence, they provided a provision in the Constitution for the states collectively impose course corrections on the federal government – the second clause of Article V.

As Idaho debates whether to join in the call for an Article V convention, the John Birch society and the Republican Party of Idaho vehemently oppose it. They claim that the act of debating amendments at a convention would place our entire bill of rights at risk. While that is theoretically possible, the ratification process makes it extremely unlikely. A convention can only propose amendments. Ratification by 38 states is required before they become law. Before his death, Justice Scalia himself argued that the need for a convention of states far outweighs the risk.

Unless accountability is reestablished, the debt will continue to rise, the government will find more ways to avoid the will of the people, and our tax dollars will continue to enrich those working against our self-governance. Sadly, there is one thing missing from arguments against an Article V convention – an alternative plan. Until opponents suggest something better, I say we go with option “2.”

If you would like to help make an Article V convention to reign in government overreach a reality, visit here to see how. Sign the petition, write your state legislator, and consider volunteering.

Page Metadata
Login Required to view?	No
Created:	2025-05-03 13:44 GMT
Updated:	2025-05-10 07:00 GMT
Published:	2025-05-03 13:49 GMT
Converted:	2025-11-11 12:05 GMT
Change Author:	John Green
Credit Author: