For several years, decades perhaps, people have talked about changing the United States Constitution to fix problems in Washington D.C. As if adding words to parchment will force those politicians that ignore the Constitution now, will suddenly start honoring their oath of office. Oh sure, add some language that if they don’t abide by it, they would be prosecuted, or kicked out office. And who would prosecute them? Congress, you know, the group that doesn’t adhere to the Constitution now. Or perhaps the courts, those Liberal judges who legislate from the bench convict one of their own? Maybe get term limits, or a balanced budget, etc.
Proponents of an Article V Constitutional Convention, also known as a Con-Con, are Progressive Liberals! And those who naively support a Con-Con argue we have to fix the U.S. Constitution. We have to be very clear on this, our Constitution is not broken! What we have is a systemic problem of politicians who refuse to honor their oath of office and defend and preserve the U.S. Constitution. No matter how many words you add to parchment, dishonorable politicians will do as they do now, ignore them.
They will tell you they can control the convention, and it would only be for one subject, this is nothing more than snake oil. Simply because no one delegate can control the convention, and do you, dear reader, think the Liberals in California, Illinois, and New York will select conservative patriotic delegates?
This writer is not alone, below is more information regarding an Article V Convention that exposes the dangers of a Con-Con:
Our very own legislature had a 2025 resolution (SJ0001) Convention of States; Sponsored by: Senator(s) Barlow, Biteman, Brennan, Driskill, Kolb, Laursen, D, Olsen and Salazar and Representative(s) Brady, Clouston, Filer, Harshman, Singh, Webb and Williams
https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2025/SJ0001
And previous sessions:
https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2024/HJ0006
https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2023/SJ0011
https://wyoleg.gov/Legislation/2021/SJ0002
“If enough states can muster interest for a Con-Con, the states would better serve their citizens and our country by supporting state nullification, because nullification addresses the problem head on, the politicians themselves. For example, politicians can enact unconstitutional laws and the states just ignore them by refusing to abide by them. This keeps the Constitution intact, and in essence makes the politicians irrelevant. Because the federal government can only do what the states allow.” 2
Our United States Constitution has the mechanism to address the issues that Con-Con supporters assert that only an Article V Convention can do, and that is the Tenth Amendment. The nay-sayers to the Tenth Amendment claim it cannot be done, but lets look at some recent issues where the 10th did in fact work. Yet simple in its nature, states such as Colorado and California enacted legislation making marijuana use legal within their states, even though the federal laws are against it. In other words, those states nullified the federal government’s laws regarding marijuana. The same process can be done with any unconstitutional federal law. How can that be? Well dear reader I’m glad you asked – simply because the States created the Federal government. That’s right – “the states created the federal government through the ratification of the United States Constitution in 1789, which established a system of governance that balanced power between the national and state governments.” 1
One final thought, if you have been paying attention to the exposing of the Deep State criminals in Washington D.C., and yes even in the states themselves, how so many of the politicians and un-elected bureaucrats work so hard stripping our Rights away and totally ignoring the U.S. Constitution, what makes you think they will adhere to any new amendment? And we’ve seen and heard over and over again how presidents, politicians, bureaucrats, main stream media, and social media networks lie. These are the same people who would continue to strip our Rights away. And make no mistake, these would be the same pool of people sending delegates to an Article V Convention of States.
If any of Wyoming’s legislators or governor advocate an Article V Convention of States (AKA: Con-Con) be sure to contact them and demand they stop. If they won’t listen to you, they should be voted out of office.
Article V
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.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
TWENTY QUESTIONS ABOUT A CONVENTION OF THE STATES
1. How would Delegates be selected or elected to a CONVENTION OF THE STATES?
2. What authority would be responsible for determining the number of Delegates from each state?
3. What authority would be responsible for electing the Delegates to the convention?
4. Would Delegates be selected based on Population, number of Registered Voters, or along Party lines?
5. Would Delegates be selected based on race, ethnicity or gender?
6. What authority would be responsible for organizing the convention, such as committee selection, committee chairs and members, etc.?
7. How would the number of Delegates serving on any committee be selected and limited?
8. How would the Chair of the Convention be selected or elected?
9. What authority will establish the Rules of the Convention, such as setting a quorum, how to proceed if a state wishes to withdraw its delegation, etc?
10. What authority would be responsible for selecting the venue for the Convention?
11. Would proposed amendments require a two-thirds majority vote for passage?
12. How would the number of votes required to pass a Constitutional Amendment be determined?
13. What would happen if the Convention of States decided to write its own rules so that 2/3 of the states need not be present to get amendments passed?
14. Could a state delegation be recalled by its legislature and its call for a convention be rescinded during the convention?
15. Would non-Delegates be permitted inside the convention hall?
16. Will demonstrators be allowed and/or controlled outside the convention hall?
17. Would congress decide to submit Convention of States amendments for ratification to the state legislatures or to a State Convention as permitted under Article V of the constitution?
18. Where would the Convention be held?
19. Who will fund this Convention?
20. If these questions cannot be answered (and they CANNOT!), then why would any
state legislator even consider voting for such an uncertain event as an Article V Convention of States?
1. https://en.wikipedia.org
2. https://thewyoming.net/beware-constitutional-convention-hb-27/
