By launching a national campaign through the NFRW clubs to pass an Article 5, Convention of States resolution in all 50 states. Sounds hard, but four state’s legislatures have already passed an Article 5 bill (made an application) in both chambers: Alabama, Florida, Missouri and West Virginia. States considering a Convention of States resolution in 2021: Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
Differences Between a Constitutional Convention and An Article V Convention
1. A Constitutional Convention proposes a new constitution and Article Five proposes a single amendment to our current constitution. We have already had a constitutional convention a long time ago and the result was the best constitution the world has seen. We want to amend the portion that did not specify term lengths of office for Congress.
2. The authority to call an Article V convention comes from the Constitution itself.
3. Requirement to call the Article V convention is applications by 34 states legislatures.
4. The Article V convention is then called by Congress.
5. Once the Term Limits Convention applications get to Congress, there is no wiggle room for legislators to insert agenda items. Their role as convention
the caller is ministerial.
6. Delegates to the convention – who can be recalled and even imprisoned by their states– have some discretion but it is limited to the one issue chosen
by the 34 states. The topic of term limits is so clear and unequivocal that it cannot be construed to include amendments on other subjects.
7. The scope of the convention is to discuss and propose a bill amending the Constitution in that single amendment only.
8. It must be voted on by all state legislatures, but will be considered ratified by 38 states and it binds ALL states.
What will term limits accomplish?
1. More qualified people willing and able to run for office. 94% of incumbents win re-election . Why? Money is a big part of this. On average incumbents
raise five times as much money as their challengers. Plus the challenger will probably have to run in a primary, which the incumbent may not, and spend money there before running in the general election.
2. Lobbyists are no fans of term limits. It makes sense. Lobbyists and the special interests they represent don’t want to see their co-dependent
relationships with career politicians come to an end. Term limits make lobbyists work harder. Term limits force lobbyists to make arguments on the merits rather than rely on sentimental relationships. Term limited congressional politicians will have to return to their home state to look for employment instead of becoming lobbyists for the special interests.
3. Special interest groups will have to appeal directly to politicians because the lobbyists are no longer the sure vote they once were.
4. Then there are the unelected bureaucrats who have wielded power over their government fiefdoms because of lack of oversight by elected officials. Having a fixed time end date due to term limits constrains bureaucracy and restricts the statutory discretion of unelected staffers. This ensures the legislators preferences are implemented while still in office. Because there is a fixed end date to their service, term limited legislators are more motivated to pass important legislation before they vacate positions. Conversely, career politicians regularly “kick the can down the road” knowing reelection rates nearly guarantee indefinite terms in office. Lack of term limits not only results in inaction, it empowers unelected bureaucrats, since lawmakers are less compelled to control the process, placing more trust and power in the hands of “seasoned staffers.”