Thank you Jon Roland. – But it is really a matter of Honor!

Mr. Roland,

Your reputation in understanding the Constitution precedes you.  Thank you for your comments.

However, with all due respect, attempting to get to the point quickly…

The problem we face today in America, or the world for that matter, has nothing to do with the law, the Constitution, or the founding documents.  In fact it has nothing to do with the language or the manner in which the words may be crafted.

The problem we face Mr. Roland, is in the degree of precision by which the participants in our society  are true to their sense of honor, ethics, morality and intent.

Everything else might as well be considered moot.

Those who are responsible for the trouble we face made the deliberate decision to dishonor his neighbors.

Arnie

 

Voila_Capture 2014-11-17_09-07-18_AM
American Civil Flag – at Peace since 1874

The truth,,,,takes so few words to express!

Available 24/7 – arnie@arnierosner.comHttp://scannedretina.com714-964-4056714-501-8247 – mobile

On Mar 15, 2015, at 1:06 PM, Jon Roland <jon.roland@constitution.org> wrote:

Testimony of

Jon Roland

before the Texas Select Committee on State and Federal Power and Responsibility

in opposition to HJR 77

March 12, 2015

I am the Founder and President of the Constitution Society, website at http://constitution.org. I urge the Texas Legislature not to adopt HJR 77, or similar proposals, to call for a convention under the terms of Article V of the Constitution for the United States. I share most of the concerns of its proponents. They hope an Article V convention might bring a solution to these problems. It will not, and it presents a real danger of making the situation much worse.

It doesn’t work to demand a remedy without providing the exact language of that remedy. Lawyers learn, perhaps the hard way, that filing a petition with a court and arguing for relief can lead to disaster, even if the judge decides in one’s favor, if one doesn’t draft the order for the judge to sign. If the judge drafts it, or even worse, accepts the wording provided by your opposition, you may get a “win” that is really a loss.

The repeated mistake of reformers is not to demand the exact language of the reform instrument. A vague demand to others to “do something” for you will get those others to do something to you.

What if a constitutional convention is held and it is our adversaries that control it, and perhaps control enough of the state legislatures as well? Be careful what you ask for. The proponents won’t be among those who go to the convention.

See the attached Draft Amendments to U.S. Constitution. The best approach is not to first call for a constitutional convention, but to get task groups, perhaps including state legislators, to develop carefully designed proposals and then get many states to propose to Congress the exact identical language of these proposals from each state, then demand that Congress adopt them and send them to the states for ratification. This process would not run the risks of a constitutional convention, which could completely replace the Constitution with one that would not protect our rights, and then provide for ratification of it by a process other than that prescribed by Article V.

The attached proposals are designed to focus and specify our demands for reform by putting each into specific language. The “clarifying amendments” would mainly overturn court precedents misinterpreting about 80 ambiguous terms in the Constitution. They could be effective in bringing reform even if not actually be adopted as amendments. They could pressure changes in practice by legislators, judges, and executive officials.

However we approach reform, if we want the Constitution interpreted differently than it is now being interpreted by judges and other officials, we have to unite in stating the exact language of how we do want it interpreted, and build a movement that can overcome resistance by Congress and other “reliance interests”. A one-shot Convention won’t do that, and it would certainly not be able to actually draft competent amendments during the Convention. There are fewer than 200 persons in this country with the knowledge and skill to do that, and none of them will be delegates.

I urge this Committee to substitute the language in the attached proposals for that of HJR 77, and resolve that Congress adopt them and send them back to the states for ratification.

-- Jon Roland

----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society               http://constitution.org
13359 N Hwy 183 #406-144               twitter.com/lex_rex
Austin, TX 78750 512/299-5001  jon.roland@constitution.org
----------------------------------------------------------

 

About arnierosner

As an American I advocate a republic form of government, self-reliance, and adherence to the basic philosophy of the founding fathers and the founding documents, I ONLY respect those who respect and "HONOR" their honor. No exceptions!
This entry was posted in Civil Rights Violations. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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