Add new comment

The "inaccuracy" is that there is a difference. There is no "convention of states" authorized in Article V. There is a "Convention for proposing Amendments" (plural). There is no requirement in Article V for applications to include an issue for which they are requesting said convention, nor is there a requirement that the aggregate applications be on the same subject, nor does it limit the subject matter at such a convention, were one to be called by "Congress." The states are welcome to call whatever interstate convention they wish, provided that any such compact they enter into is approved by Congress. I find it extremely Orwellian that proponents of an Article V "Convention for proposing Amendments" believe they can control a "federal process" already sanctioned by the states via ratification of the Constitution, or that they can make the rules. And then there is the 800 pound gorilla: The Constitution isn't the problem. Amending it isn't the solution.