Miscellaneous

Right now they’re covering Beau Biden’s funeral.  Why wouldn’t they cover the San Diego Summit?  Just the first business session, from 9:00 a.m. PDT to 11:30.  This is the session devoted to discussion, adoption, and signing of the One State, One Vote, One Amendment Resolution.  They’ll cover it, and that will encourage attendance.

Let’s say you’re Mike Thibodeau, President of the Maine Senate.  You don’t feel like flying to San Diego for a meeting.  But would you be willing to participate telephonically, or by Skype, in a two and a half hour Saturday meeting of your peers from around the country?  A meeting dealing with the procedures to be followed at the 2016 Amendment Convention, which you do plan to attend?

I would argue forcefully that any presiding officer who does not participate, in one way or another, in this meeting is derelict in their duty.  Article V gives Thibodeau, and the Senators who elected him their leader, a critical function in our constitutional system.  By refusing to participate Thibodeau is turning his back on the legislative leaders who are trying to do their duty.

What if you’re the Speaker of the California Assembly, a hard core, partisan, very liberal Democrat?  You voted for, and the California legislature adopted, an Article V Resolution to overturn Citizens United.  You’re not afraid of Article V.  Ryan Clayton of Wolf-pac has educated you.  You understand that the BBA has 27, and might get to 34, and you’re adamantly opposed to it.  You don’t want to do anything which will promote it.  But if there is to be a BBA Convention, you want it to be limited to one subject.  And you feel you have an obligation to speak out against One State, One Vote.  You represent 10% of the people in this country.  Why should Wyoming, which has 1/6 of 1% of the population, have a vote equal to yours?  You want to make that case, even if you know you’ll be voted down.  So you book an early flight from Sacramento to San Diego, or you participate remotely.  You have an obligation to do so.

Precedents will be set in San Diego.  One of them should be that physical presence is not required for full participation.  Rep. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois wanted to vote on a leadership election in the Democratic Caucus, but she was about to give birth, and could not attend the session.  Her colleagues voted to deny her that right.  That’s bullshit.  There’s no reason in the world she shouldn’t have been allowed to vote.  Everybody who wants to will vote in San Diego, whether they’re present or not.  This, in my opinion, is a very significant precedent.  It can apply to future meetings of the Convention Majority Caucus, and perhaps to the proceedings of the Convention itself.  Let’s say you’re the President of the Michigan Senate.  You’re the leader of Michigan’s delegation to the Convention.  The Michigan legislature is in session virtually year round, and you commute between Ann Arbor ad Richmond.  For some reason you have to be in Michigan when a vote is taking place at the Convention.  You should be able to vote remotely.

Actually, come to think of it, this should be among the first orders of business in San Diego.  A rule should be adopted allowing full remote participation.  This is the 21st Century.  There has been a communications revolution.

As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew.  We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.

Loren Enns made a great suggestion today.  For presiding officers who can’t make it to San Diego we’ll set up a telephonic connection where they will participate remotely.  We may not get 26 to the meeting, but we should have 26 who agree to sign the Resolution, committing them, personally, to do everything in their power to one state, one vote and one Amendment.  We’ll have several copies and FedEx them around to whoever is willing to sign.  I bet we get 30.

I guess I’ll be on the phone with whomever is calling in, and will ask Faber to allow them to speak when they indicate to me a desire to do so.  We’ll figure it out.

Lew Uhler invited Chairman Goodlatte to the meeting but he has a prior commitment.  We will want to patch him in so that he can confirm that he will aggregate our 27 Resos, will not attempt in any way to control the Convention, and will refuse to send any Amendment out for ratification that exceeds the scope of the call.  I believe he will do this for us and that it will have an impact.

My wife and I flew to Kauai yesterday, so blogging will be light for the next couple weeks.

The Republican nomination fight is designed to be over by the Ides of March, and the winner take all primary in Florida.  But there are so many plausible candidates it could extend into May, or even June.

The fate of our little project will be decided in March.  We should have 33 states by then.  Wisconsin will have been our 28th, then, in March of 2016, Wyoming 29, West Virginia 30, Virginia 31, Idaho 32, and Oklahoma 33.   All in March, or not at all.  I’m assuming Maryland will rescind, so our magic number is not 34, it’s 35.  Arizona looks to be in session until April 21st.  South Carolina will be open for business until approximately June 5th.

By the end of March there should only be, at most, three or four candidates still standing.  All of them will support our cause.  Politically, it’s a no-brainer.  If we’re at 33, it’s a national story.  It’s a competing story line to the nomination fight, and a connected one.  If Kasich is still in it we can count on him to beat our drum.  What about his competition?  They will have to play along.  They’ll have no choice.

So all the Republican Presidential candidates will be pounding on the Arizona and South Carolina Senates to bring our bill to the floor for a vote.  Andy Biggs and Hugh Leatherman will become known to the American people.  Maybe they don’t give a rat’s ass what people outside their state thinks, but I’ll bet the people of Arizona and South Carolina will pressure them.

It would make for great reality TV.  In fact, the whole road to 34 would make a good reality TV show.  You can introduce a new cast of characters every week.  You have a show on Wyoming, and people get to meet Eli Bebout, who is quite a guy.  Next week you’re in Boise, with blustering Bart Davis, and the comely Chair of Ways and Means, Christy Perry.  Then on to Oklahoma, and all the cowboy boots and big hats, and then the magnificent Capitol in Richmond and a whole new cast of characters.  It would be good TV.  Maybe somebody can do something with it.  I would, if I could.

Back to the point  — we’ll win or lose this thing ten months from now.  Time is short, and that’s a good thing as far as I’m concerned.  I want to get this thing over with.  But you have to ask yourself, what difference does it make if it’s 2016 or 2017?  Will the Republic fall if we’re a year late?  Will the new Republican President be hamstrung by the absence of a BBA?  Will we start to lose states in a counterattack?

No, no, and no.  So I won’t have a heart attack if we don’t make it next year.

As long as we make it.

The cc with Sen. Faber went well, and the San Diego Summit is on track.  I can confidently cite ten states that I know will have presiding officers in attendance.  I’d be very surprised and disappointed if we wind up with less that 20.  I think there’s a very good chance we get 26 or more.

Today we had our first San Diego cc, where we divided up the 50 states according to who will make the follow up phone calls after the invitation goes out.   We’ll continue to have weekly cc’s, Mondays at 4:00 p.m. EDT.

I don’t know how many people read this blog, or who they might be.  The help we need is in certain states where, at the moment, we have no particular idea of how to proceed.  If need be, a phone call will go to the Chief of Staff of the presiding officer being invited.  But we have  legislative contacts in most states who can assist.  The states where we’re starting from scratch are Alabama, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New York, Vermont, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Jersey.  That’s fifteen states.  And we want every state, red, purple or blue.  So if you know of an approach we can take in one of these states let me know at fpettyjohn@hotmail.com.  I’d love to hear from you.

Democrats should attend this Summit, regardless of how they feel about Article V or a BBA.  This Amendment Convention is going to happen.  I’m convinced it will happen next year, but even if I’m wrong and we come up short we’ll succeed in 2017, if we have to.  I’m convinced that 2016 is a very good year for Republicans, so the Congress should stay under friendly control.  There’s an excellent chance Republicans get complete control of additional legislative chambers as well.  Maine, Kentucky and Washington could be top targets in 2016, and there’s an outside shot at Oregon.  So if there is to be an Article V Convention, why shouldn’t a Democrat take part in the preparations for it?  Especially if those preparations are nonpartisan, such as insuring one state, one vote, one Amendment.  And Democrats are people too.  I’m a Democrat, for Pete’s sake.  We enjoy San Diego as much as Republicans, and we like our expenses paid too.  So by rights we should see some D’s.

The Reagan Initiative will not be on the agenda.  I thought it would be necessary to attract attendance, but it looks like I was wrong.  There will be discussions of the Reagan Initiative, of course.  I’ll be there and I’m damn sure going to talk to people about it.  But let’s not put the cart before the horse.   First things first.  There will be plenty of time to introduce this concept, once everyone has signed on to the Three One’s.  It’s something a lot of people may need time to wrap their heads around.

Unless we get 34 states in San Diego we should hold a follow up meeting in December.  The group in San Diego will decide if it’s necessary, and where and when it will be.  It should be on the East Coast, so the next ALEC meeting, in Scottsdale, won’t work very well.  If NCSL has their “Forum” in D.C., as they did last year, we could tie into that.  I, personally, would really like to meet at the Capitol in Annapolis, for obvious reasons.

When Virginia invited the other states to Annapolis to discuss amending the Articles, only four showed up.  40%, five of thirteen, were present.  If we get twenty in San Diego, that will be 40% as well.  It’s a good number to shoot for.

The Framers are legends.  Every one of them.  There will never be an assembly of Americans that can compare with them.  It was almost Providential.  The problem is that the Framers are held in such esteem that Americans, quite rightly, look on contemporary politicians as pygmies by comparison.  Anyone attempting to organize an Article V Convention must keep this in mind at all times.  We are not correcting their work, or improving their work, or making any basic changes.  We’re just correcting an oversight.  There was no Bill of Rights in the Constitution.  That was an oversight.  It was corrected.  A Balanced Budget Amendment corrects an oversight.  An oversight that threatens the continued existence of the Republic.

We’re not in the same league with the Framers, and we don’t pretend to be.  But we can act as they expected us to act.  We can step up, and pick up the tool they left for us, and use it as it was designed to be used.

We can be worthy of them.

First we had the Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force.  A name only an accountant could love.  Now we have the Citizens for a Balanced Budget Amendment Convention.  Not much of an improvement.  Biddulph is looking for a new name, and I’m suggesting “One State, One Vote, One Amendment.”  It’s simple, and it makes a point.  We will make it the theme of the San Diego Summit, as in:

The San Diego Legislative Summit

July 25, 2015

One State, One Vote, One Amendment

I’m hoping for a big turnout.  We want presiding officers, but Majority Leaders, who have been designated as the representatives of presiding officers, would be fine as well.  If you’re in Mississippi, or New Jersey, or Minnesota it’s hot and humid in July.  San Diego has the best weather in the world, with lots of fun things to do.  Why not fly out with the spouse for an expense paid long weekend, and spend one day talking about a Convention that you may be leading a delegation to next year  — a Convention that will make history by proposing a supremely important Amendment to the Constitution?  Why wouldn’t you go?  I haven’t talked to any legislator who wasn’t interested.  We actually might get 26, or more.  Whatever we get, I’m betting the participants will be ready for Round Two, in Annapolis in December.

Rand Paul was not completely out of line in suggesting Republican hawks, like Lindsey Graham and John McCain, are partly responsible for the rise of ISIS.  He overstated his case, as he is wont to do, but he had a point.  It seems like he’s the only announced  Republican who learned from Bush’s disastrous mistakes in Iraq.  All the others who have declared don’t want to seem antiwar, or soft on Islamic Terror, or too hard on Bush.  But there are a whole lot of Republicans who think Iraq was a disaster.  FUBAR.  Paul, and no one else, is speaking for them.

Query:  why didn’t we declare war on Iraq when we invaded it?  I have no idea.  There must be a reason.  We didn’t declare war in Vietnam, or North Korea either.  Maybe we shouldn’t go to war unless Congress passes a Declaration of War.  It’s one of those crazy ideas that just might work.

We are not at war today.  We do not want war.  Anti-terrorism operations may resemble wars, but they’re not the same at all.  We’re not fighting a nation-state that controls and is sovereign over a certain territory.  We’re trying to kill a bunch of lunatics who are creating havoc around the world.  With modern intelligence gathering, and drones, and Special Forces, we have the tools to kill them.  We need to stay at it, as long as they’re around.  Find them and kill them.  Don’t capture and imprison them.  Just kill them.  Every day some of these sons of bitches need to die.  It should be a regular feature on the Nightly News.  Which ones of these bastards did we get today?

Oddly enough foreign policy could be a big factor in the Republican nomination.  We need a new foreign policy, one that’s grounded in non-interventionism.  George Washington told us to avoid the entangling alliances of Europe.  His advice is as good today as it was 218 years ago.  We stayed in Europe after WW2 to stop Communism.  We succeeded.  We’re still there to stop the Russians and Germans from going at each other again.  I say we tell the Germans we’ll give you four more years, then they’re on their own.  If they can’t put together an army, and a coalition, to deter the Russians that’s their problem, not ours.  I say sayonara to Europe in 2020, and South Korea as well.  We want allies, and naval and air stations, around the world.  We don’t want our soldiers as trip wires to war.

Here’s a political slogan for you.

Peace and Prosperity.