Convention of Waste
Any amendments that could be ratified now would have no effect, would undercut the Constitution, or would be defied. Our problem isn’t the Constitution, it’s the Progressive parties. The only solution is to elect constitutionalists—people who use their constitutional powers to limit others in government.
May 21, 2021
If 2/3 of state legislatures would apply to Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments , and amendments would be proposed, what would happen next?
Either 3/4 of state legislatures or 3/4 of state conventions could ratify the amendments.
For amendments intended to strengthen the Constitution, as of 2020 the swing state—the state with the next-less-Progressive legislature after Hawaii, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, California, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Vermont, New Jersey, Nevada, New Mexico, and Connecticut—was Oregon, whose least-Democratic legislative house, the senate, was 60% Democratic .
The swing vote for the whole nation was whichever Oregon Democratic senator was more Progressive than 17% of Oregon Democratic senators.
If an amendment would be ratified, what would happen next?
Each part of the amendment either would be used to undercut the Constitution, would have no effect, or would be defied in national, state, county, and city governments by the Progressive majority of both parties’ elected representatives.
In Congress as of today, for example, for bills intended to strengthen the Constitution, the swing vote in the House has a Conservative Review Liberty Score of only 20% in favor of liberty, and the swing vote in the Senate (the 50th senator on the Vice President’s side ) has a Liberty Score of only 18% in favor of liberty . Such Progressive congresses pass bills, and the bills are signed by Progressive presidents from both parties .
Progressive governments like these have, for over a century, systematically defied the Constitution, and would systematically defy any amendments intended to strengthen the Constitution:
Other amendments could be proposed and ratified, but the results would be the same. For every new amendment intended to strengthen the Constitution, there would be unanticipated consequences and Progressive workarounds.
Progressives defy the Constitution constantly.
The Problem Is the Progressive Parties
The Constitution’s original drafters and ratifiers took precautions that reflected reasonably-good sense about how people might abuse their offices .
Even if today’s drafters and ratifiers had just as much good sense, enacting more rules would not be enough to prevent Progressives from innovating to defy the Constitution.
But among today’s drafters and ratifiers, the people who are the swing votes don’t simply lack the original drafters’ and ratifiers’ good sense. No, the people who are the swing votes already unceasingly defy the current Constitution for a living .
Every Progressive would game every new amendment.
If the effort spent organizing to propose amendments would build a movement that could then move on to effective action, this effort might be inadvertently positive, although costly.
But the amendment approach has, in spades, the one characteristic that interferes the most with receiving feedback, taking better action, and achieving a desired result: between the time when actions are first taken and the time when effects are first seen, there’s an enormous time delay or deadtime .
When scarce resources are put to a use that’s of less value than alternative uses , what results is, in a word, waste.
The Solution Is to Elect Constitutionalists
The problem isn’t the Constitution, the problem is the Constitution defiance by Progressive elected representatives from our two major parties.
The solution isn’t to change the Constitution, the solution is to select and elect representatives who will use their constitutional powers against others in government, limiting our governments.
For now, constitutionalist candidates need our discernment and votes, especially in primaries .
As soon as possible, constitutionalists need a good major party that applies  the Constitution’s superb design of separated powers, limited enumerated powers, and offsetting powers to also limit at least one good party . When a good party is built by voters, activists, and media, new politicians will join in , and existing constitutionalist politicians will vote with them .
What won’t work is to add more rules and wait and see. What will work is to use the powers we have, with vigilant broken-windows policing of the smallest Constitution-defiance.
The solution isn’t to balance power, it’s to overpower Progressives. Constantly. Forever.
James Anthony is the author of The Constitution Needs a Good Party and rConstitution Papers and has written articles in The Federalist, Foundation for Economic Education, American Thinker, American Greatness, and rConstitution.us. Mr. Anthony is an experienced chemical engineer with a master’s in mechanical engineering.