An American Revitalization: the State Convention Amendment Method

Hi all!

I was doing some thinking about our citizens' views on our federal government (specifically, the Congress) and I came to a conclusion: we should directly reform our Constitution.  (I'll explain how the Constitution can be amended by citizens in a bit).

According to separate polls conducted by Gallup and Rasmussen, no more than 18% of the population approves of the job our congresspersons are doing.  You can see the polls here http://www.gallup.com/poll/147227/Congressional-Job-Approval.aspx and here http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_performance.

In my opinion, it is unacceptable that the individuals in charge of drafting and approving our nation's laws are given such great powers despite the fact they are hated by the nation.  Americans see their legislators as corrupt, self-serving, ineffective drags on society, and, yet, we still give them these important powers.  It appears to me that the solution is congressional term limits and salary reductions; I believe we will then have the "periodic rotation" of rulers that George Mason and Thomas Jefferson desired.  However, no congressperson would ever cap the number of years he or she could serve or cut the amount of money he or she could make: the congressional job is too good and it would be irrational for any congressperson to curtail his or her benefits.

Thankfully, the country's founders provided ordinary people with a way to bypass Congress when amending our governing document.  In Article V of the Constitution, the Founding Fathers established four ways for the Constitution to be amended. These four paths are: "proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used); proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used); proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once); and, finally, proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)".  (Source: http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html).

The paths that intrigue me the most are the first and second ones.  Both have never been used, and I believe it is time for us citizens to use them.  In the first method (proposal and ratification by conventions), citizens have a direct input in both the creation and acceptance of an amendment.  In the second method, citizens from each state meet in a convention and create an amendment; after that has been done, 3/4 of state legislatures must approve the convention's amendment.  (See: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_acon.html).

The main problem is that neither method has been used, and, so, there is no precedent.  However, Americans increasingly believe the corruption in (and ineffectiveness of) our Congress is unprecedented; we therefore have the obligation to change things for the better.  Alexander Hamilton and the rest of the Founders gave us these tools to keep our leaders in check, and that is precisely what we should be doing right now.  

Can conventions actually work, though?  Well, our Constitution was created in a convention that began in 1787.  Do you think that worked?  I do (for the most part, but it does need tweaking as the USA evolves).  

In sum, the main point I want to establish is that our current system of producing legislation is illogical and damaging.  We have a constitutional reprieve, however: state conventions.  Congress has always been hated (see: http://www.npr.org/2010/12/17/132141805/why-we-love-to-hate-congress) but we as a people have not aggressively sought changes.  I believe now is a good time to use the methods the Constitution has provided us with a way to correct the problems we face in terms of corrupt legislators.  We just need to spread the word and actively seek this outcome.