Article Five of the United States Constitution – Wikipedia
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.[3]
Why Article V?
Democracy is a weak form of government. A constant conflict exists between those in power, whose primary objective is to obtain more power, and the wishes of the general population to retain a fair and just government.
Key to continuation of a democracy is balance of power. The objective of those who wish to obtain more power is to tear down the balance of power. In recent years, in this country, those whose objective is to obtain more power have succeeded in reducing checks and balances. This is a result of the smartest and best positioned leaders seizing opportunity and executing a long term plan.
Our Founders set up Congress to be the primary place of power in our government. It is Article I of our Constitution. It follows that those seeking to obtain more power must first reduce the power of Congress in order to achieve their objectives. Secondly, those seeking more power must reduce the stabilizing influence of the courts.
Those seeking more power favor a more authoritarian form of government. Loyalty and support of a strong leader brings favor, over and above traditional power, to loyal power seekers. A shift to a more authoritarian form of government has taken place in recent years in this country. Here are some examples.
The trial of Bill Clinton and the trial of Donald Trump have provided overriding evidence that, considering the recent political climate, a President cannot be impeached and removed from office. This alone substantially increases the power of our most powerful leader.
The leader of Senate has refused to allow open discussion on many high profile pieces of legislation. For many issues, Congress has ground to a halt. That has weakened the branch of government created by Article I of the Constitution. This is in addition to the fact that many important issues such as gun rights, reproductive rights, and campaign finance reform have been punted to the court system rather than legislated by Congress. Fewer actions by Congress, by default, give more power to the other two branches of government. Extrapolation of this trend gives all the power to the President.
Congress’s ability to oversee appointments to the Supreme Court has been seriously weakened. The President may now appoint biased judges at will. Note the open bias of the most recent Supreme Court nominee and the 9th grievance against King George III in the Declaration of Independence railing against biased judges. When the court is packed with biased judges by a President who seeks to be an authoritarian leader, the court becomes a rubber stamp on the wishes of the President.
Our laws indirectly allow the power shift.
This reality in hand, the average American should consider that the authoritarian ruler outcome was not intent of our Founders and is in direct opposition to the principles laid out in the second sentence of the Declaration of Independence. The fourth sentence of the Declaration of Independence gives Americans groundwork to oppose the concept of authoritarian rule. Change is often difficult. Common knowledge is that it is easier to work within the system that to throw away the system and start over. Article V of the Constitution provides an opportunity for changing the laws. The other, and less desirable, option is taking to the streets and moving in the direction of an uncertain outcome.
Working on change through the use of Article V is the logical option.
Article V 