Author: Fritz Pettyjohn

How about 2017?   No one wants to hear that.  The people involved in pushing the Article V BBA are reaching the end of their rope.  But you have to admit we could be a state or two short next year.  Would that be the end of the world, or the end of this campaign?  Of course not.

I don’t pretend to be a numbers guy; I rely on other people.  My sense is that, from a policy standpoint, a delay of another year for the BBA wouldn’t be fatal.  We won’t go bankrupt because of it.

There’s no question in my mind that getting to 34 in 2016 would help Republican candidates.  The BBA has the support of 65% of Democratic voters, but it’s still seen as a Republican issue.  But the fight for a BBA isn’t being waged on behalf of the Republican Party.  It is an unintended beneficiary.  And I don’t think the Republicans will need any help from the BBA in 2016.  Everything is breaking their way.  The ridiculously antidemocratic Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage is just the latest example.  By taking this issue off the table the Court helps Republicans.  Public opinion, especially among the young, has been moving fast on this topic, and the GOP is much better off not talking about it.

If we don’t care about helping Republicans next year, and the economy won’t collapse with another year of fiscal indiscipline, what’s the downside of 2017?  Besides exhaustion.  Will people get tired of talking about it?  Not likely.   The vast majority of people don’t know anything about it.

And that’s been the problem from the beginning.  The great mass of people in this country have never heard of Article V.  They’re completely unaware that if seven solidly Republican states pass our Resolution the first Amendment Convention in our history will be called.  No one realizes that the Constitution was designed with a mechanism to allow the states to control the federal government.  The people of this country have totally had it with the federal government.  It’s the enemy.  It taxes us, spies on us, regulates us and tries to control our lives.  Congress is a laughingstock.  As the Democrats go through the paroxysms of “peak left” normal people will be ready for a new solution  — Article V.

If they know it exists.  We’re counting on Kasich to get the ball rolling in the Presidential debates.  But we need to do more, a lot more.  I talked this morning with Gerald Molen, who won an Academy Award for producing “Schindler’s List”, and also produced both of Dinesh D’Souza’s documentaries.  I explained the Article V BBA and the Federal Assembly to him, and he seemed to get it.  He said Dinesh is in Hawaii with his daughter for the next couple weeks, but that when he gets back he’ll email him and let him know what we’re doing in San Diego.  Molen gave me the impression that he thinks D’Souza might be interested in working on a full scale documentary on what we’re doing.

It’s a start.  Even if it doesn’t work out with D’Souza, the fact that Molen “gets it” on Article V (he’s a big time conservative) means he might be willing to get me a hearing with other potential documentary makers, or maybe some kind of reality TV.  Anything to get the public educated and involved.

With the people behind us we win.  If the people knew about us, they’d be behind us.  There is a way to get through to them.  The message is too powerful, and hopeful, to be hidden much longer.  We will get the word out.

Then we win.

Politics and law.  What’s the difference?  In upholding Obamacare and Disparate Impact (DI) today the Supreme Court demonstrated that whatever the distinction is, it doesn’t make a difference.

I guess it would be nice if the Supreme Court did our work for us, but they are not so inclined.  Justices and lawyers won’t save this country.  It’s up to us.

What will save us is Article V, and these decisions don’t hurt our cause.  I would argue they’ll help.  If the Supremes had gutted Obamacare all hell would have broken loose.  The R’s running Congress would have been at total war with one another.  Some, probably most, would want to kick the can down the road by temporarily providing the funding to all the federal exchanges.  They would try to get some concessions from Obama, but I doubt he’d give them anything, so they’d cave in the end.  It all would have been very ugly.

Obamacare was the high water mark of progressivism.  When it collapsed in October of 2013 the tide turned, and has been running with us ever since.  In upholding it today the Justices didn’t make it any better.  It’s still a dog’s breakfast.  The alienation from the federales which fuels the Article V movement stems, in part, from Obamacare.  Let it fester.  It will only get worse.  Obamacare is the political gift that will keep on giving.

In my mind you could argue the impact of the Obamacare ruling either way.  You could say a different decision might have helped us.  Not so with Disparate Impact.  This truly atrocious decision could be a godsend, politically.  Affirmative action has never been a political winner.  DI is affirmative action on steroids.  If a policy has some sort of demonstrable negative impact on blacks, it’s illegal.  That’s it!  How cool is that.  I’m exaggerating, but not much.

Blue collar whites in the heartland detest DI.  It impacts them and their sons in a very personal way.  Say your boy wants to be a fireman or a policeman.  You and he know damn well the color of his skin is a major negative.  That pisses guys off.

Will the Republican presidential candidates have the balls to campaign on repealing DI?  We should soon find out.  Sometimes I get New Hampshire envy.  I wish I was in the Granite State so I could ask these people that question directly.  If they’re afraid to take a stand against DI, they’re made of cardboard.

If the Republican candidate for President handles the repeal of DI in the proper way, it can take them to the White House.  I think you win Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and Michigan with it.

Kevin Williamson writes at NRO, and he’s got a piece out that nails it.  He says with the coming departure of The One the left is going nutty.  They’ve damaged this country, but they’re a long way from transforming it, and they’re frustrated.  Campus rape, micro-aggressions, transgender naziism, the list goes on.  Kevin says we’ve reached peak leftism and I agree.  They just keep getting nuttier.  Back in Waupun, and West Bend, and Shegoygan Mr. and Mrs. Normal American have got to be looking incredulously at each other.  These people are crazy!  And Hillary is leading the god damn charge.  This deranged harridan is out spouting the latest leftist bullshit at the top of her lungs.

How much better can it get?

John Weaver is apparently Gov. John Kasich’s top campaign strategist.  Part of his job is messaging, and so far, looking in from the outside, he’s falling down on the job.

Wherever he goes, Kasich will be challenged by conservatives opposed to the expansion of Medicaid.  It happened in Helena, Montana, when he was urging adoption of an Article V BBA Resolution.  And, according to news accounts, it’s happening in fund raising meetings.  He gets defensive, combative and self-righteous when the subject comes up.  If that’s his attitude in the debates, he’s toast.

He has an answer, and a good one.  If he’s renowned for anything, it’s as a budget hawk.  He fought like hell to balance the budget when he was in Congress.  He balanced Ohio’s budget.  And, as President, he’s the one who would actually get it done.  Been there, done that  — will do it again.  When he looked at the impact of Medicaid expansion on the State of Ohio’s budget, he decided the state could afford it.  Short term and long term, Medicaid will not bust Ohio’s budget.  There are hundreds of thousands of low income Ohio residents who will benefit from this program.  As Governor, he has a responsibility to them.  They are his constituents, and he wants them to have the best medical care possible.  So he took the money,   knowing full well the State of Ohio will soon be picking up the tab  — but Ohio can afford it.  He would know, of all people.  Would he impose this decision on other states?  Hell no.  If South Carolina doesn’t want to expand Medicaid that’s their business.  He’s the Governor of Ohio, not South Carolina.  His Ohio values led him to this decision.  And as President he would not force Medicaid expansion on any state.  He will not impose Ohio values on the rest of the country.  That call is not up to the feds.  Each state gets to decide.

That’s the story he needs to tell.  He sure as hell doesn’t need to lecture people about their Christian duty, or brag about his cred at the pearly gates.  It’s fine, it’s admirable, to help those in the shadows.  That job is for the states, and local communities, and churches, and all the other charitable institutions in this country.

It is not the job of the federal government.  He knows that.  The feds have a limited role in our system of government.

He could even go off on what those Ohio values are.  Tell the story of Ohio, and why it has always, since it gained statehood over 200 years ago, been the bellwether of the country, striking the balance between north and south.  When it was settled people came from Yankeeland and Virginia, and everything in between.  The people of Ohio mind their own business, but they also feel an obligation to one another.

Any question about Medicaid in Ohio can easily be turned into a discussion of fiscal discipline.  Who has demonstrated it over the course of a thirty year career in politics, at the state and federal level, and is determined to impose that discipline from the White House?  Take it to the bank.  John Kasich will balance the budget.   Period.  But in doing so he will be mindful of all the people on Social Security and Medicare who rely so heavily on those programs.

Weaver needs to sit down with Kasich and work this message out.  And Kasich then needs to show the discipline to repeat it, over and over, any time the subject comes up.  Jeb famously flubbed a question on Iraq that he knew was coming, and he paid a price.  If Kasich gets all riled up every time someone brings up Medicare, Weaver will be out of a job soon enough.

The greatest line in the history of Presidential debates was the Gipper’s, “There you go again.”  He said it with a smile, as though he was a little disappointed with Carter.  Nobody can be Ronald Reagan.

But we can try.

When Boehner throws in the towel one of the candidates for his job should try something new.  Campaign as a member friendly Speaker, who would push a rule allowing remote voting, and attendance.  You could fly to D.C., get sworn in, set up your office, and go home  — and stay home.  When there’s a committee meeting you need to attend, you’d go to your local Congressional office and participate remotely.  Your constituents could be in the room with you while you do your committee work.  You might fly to D.C. once in a while for a floor vote..  Or not.  It’s up to you.  You could vote from your office if you want.  Would your constituents rather have you home in the district, where they can keep an eye on you, and set you straight if necessary, or would they want you rubbing shoulders with all the fat cat lobbyists?

Most people would spend most of their time in D.C.  You can be a more effective committee member if you’re physically present.  But members should be given the choice.   You could do week on, week off.  You could do whatever you, and your constituents, wanted to do.

This would definitely make it harder to be Speaker, but it would be manageable.  I think the members would want it, and vote for it.  This is the 21st century.  The technology’s there.  Why not give it a try?

I’ve believed in this idea for a long time, and wait in vain for somebody to push it.  What makes it relevant is San Diego.  We may have 20, or 30, or even 40 people participating remotely.  This will be a technical and a managerial problem, but it can be dealt with.  We’ll show Congress how it’s done, and maybe they’ll be inspired to give it a try.

The first meeting of the Federal Assembly is a month away, and it’s time for the big push.  I sent out around 65 emails to Presiding Officers (PO’s) in the last two days.  We’re having a cc tomorrow and we’ll figure out who is going to work the 15 states I didn’t work on.  Once we get fifteen or twenty commitments this thing should snowball, especially since remote participation is encouraged.  Some of these people will probably call in for the hell of it.  It’s something a little different.  PO’s are generally pretty responsible people.  I would argue they have a positive duty to take part in a meeting of this sort  — dealing with their constitutional duties under Article V.  They should, at the minimum, ask their Majority Leader to cover for them.  It’s a Saturday, for God’s sake.  There’s no excuse for a PO to blow this off.

Most of these PO’s that I’ve talked to don’t know that many of their peers from other states  — but they know a few of them.  If we can get these people talking to each other about this thing it will build the momentum.  The next couple weeks will be critical.

My wife and I drive to Montana on Tuesday and Wednesday.  Be there a month.  By chance our route takes us through Idaho Falls, the home of Idaho Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis.  He killed our bill, and wants to kill it again.  I’ll be calling for an appointment to see him. I want to explain the Federal Assembly, and ask him to show up.  He may not even see me.  It’s worth a try.

Because it’s taking place at all, San Diego is a success.  How great a success will be determined by how many participate.  But there will be such a thing as the Federal Assembly.  It’s a meeting of delegates from the states, exclusively devoted to discussing their duties under Article V, and, more specifically, one proposed Article V Amendment  — the BBA.  Nothing exactly like it has been done before.  There’s a reason it’s happening now.

It’s the tide.

Ohio filled up quickly.  When the tribes were defeated at the Battle of Fallen Timbers in 1794 it immediately attracted swarms of settlers, many of them Revolutionary War veterans exercising land grants they had been awarded for their service.*  By 1803 it was admitted as the 17th state.

The Western Reserve, in the northeast, was largely settled by New Englanders, the southern part by Virginians, and the middle by Midlanders.  Colin Woodard, in “American Nations”, identifies Midlanders as the American arbiters  — when they vote with Yankees, Yankees win.  When they vote with Virginia, Virginia wins.  They are not meddlesome moralists, like the New Englanders.  But they’re not libertarian southerners either.  They’re in the middle.  They were even before the founding.  They have been throughout our entire history, right up to today.

The first Midlanders were Pennsylvania Quakers, staunch pacifists.  They refused to fight in the Revolutionary War.  Their political dominance in Pennsylvania faded, however, when they even refused to fight the Indians.  The Germans who came immediately behind the Quakers were strongly antiwar.  They came from a country nearly ruined by sectarian wars.  They hated war.  But they weren’t pacifists, and while Midlanders began as Quakers, they soon became more German-American than anything else.  Quakers (they were like Shakers, except they only quaked with religious enthusiasm) faded into near irrelevance.  The Germans kept coming, in huge waves.  There was even talk of keeping them out, there were so damn many of them.

Midlanders believed in minding their own business.  They didn’t like slavery, but they didn’t want to fight a war over it.  So they were Democrats leading up to the Civil War.  But Lincoln convinced enough of them  — barely  — to win Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, and thus the Presidency.

Midlanders will decide the election of 2016, just as they’ve pretty much decided every election.  It’s been North vs. South since the very beginning, and the Midlanders get to decide.  The American heartland, the Midwest, middle America, the Midlands  — whatever you want to call it  — has the same values it always has.  They want to mind their own business.  They don’t want to tell people how to live their lives.  The Germans who settled middle America were Catholic, Protestant, and Dissenters  — Moravians, Amish, Mennonites, Pietists.  They got along with each other.  They weren’t going to fight over religion, or anything else.  They were tolerant.  It is the ethic of Middle America  — tolerance.

Middle America is tolerant all over the world.  It doesn’t want to fight in wars overseas, pick winners and losers.  Let the people of the world find their own way.  Let’s mind our own business.

That’s what Middle America wants to hear.

* Including my direct ancestor, John Pettyjohn.