Nicki ponders the wisdom and risks of a Constitutional Convention.
As I pointed out last year, this is a horrible idea, and opens the republic up to all sorts of danger.
Since the basic problem people want fixed is a government that most people hate, I wonder if two-thirds of a Congress hated by most people would go along. Or if two-thirds of state legislatures (really; think about your legislature). But let’s pretend the call succeeds.
And those state legislatures you hate — you know, like the Dimwits in Atlanta who want to ban all mag-fed rifles with grips — appoint the delegates.
That’ll go well.
Over at Nicki’s blog, commenter Alex thinks the scope of such a convention could be limited, to keep it from getting out of control.
Patrick Henry didn’t think so, and I’d say history proved him right. 70 delegates were apppointed. Only 55 participated at all, several walked out, some simply refused to sign. Out of the 70 total, only 39 signed.
Not quite like an earlier unanimous signing.
We haven’t had a constitutional government since at least the Civil War. Why expect that to change if people want an Article V convention, or that some new constitution would fare any better?