An Article V Convention would advance the interests of a select few

1
An Article V Convention would advance the interests of a select few

Editor, The Beacon:

After reading an editorial in your paper, on the Convention of States, I feel I must express my opinion.

Across the country, there is a growing call for an Article V Convention, with wealthy donors, corporations and radical far-right actors leading the charge. This movement aims to reshape our Constitution, but the question we must ask is: Who stands to benefit from such a convention?

The motivations behind this push for an Article V Convention are not rooted in the principles of democracy or equal representation. Rather, it appears that these efforts are driven by a desire to consolidate power and advance the interests of a select few.

The Convention of States, the organization spearheading this movement, promotes a highly unrepresentative and undemocratic method of amending our Constitution. By advocating for a convention, they seek to enable a minority of Americans to amend our nation’s most fundamental governing document.

One of the key concerns with an Article V Convention is the potential for a “one-state, one-vote” process. This means that each state, regardless of its population, would have an equal say in the amendment process. While this may sound fair in theory, it would have significant consequences for the representation of diverse populations.

Let’s consider the example of Wyoming and California. Wyoming, with a population of only 576,000, would have the same voting power as California, a state with a diverse population of 39.5 million. This means that a small, predominantly white state would have the same influence over the amendment process as a large, diverse state.

Similarly, North Dakota, with a population of 779,000, would have the same voting power as New York, a state with a diverse population of 19.7 million. Once again, this would grant disproportionate power to a small, less diverse state.

This raises serious concerns about the potential for the voices of minority communities to be silenced in the amendment process. By giving equal weight to states with vastly different populations, an Article V Convention would undermine the principle of equal representation and allow for the interests of a white minority to prevail.

It is crucial that we recognize the potential dangers of an Article V Convention and the implications it could have for our democracy. While the idea of amending the Constitution may seem appealing, we must carefully consider the methods and consequences of such a process. Instead of pursuing an unrepresentative and undemocratic convention, we should focus on strengthening our existing democratic institutions and ensuring that all voices are heard and represented. This means advocating for fair and equitable processes that consider the diversity and varying needs of our nation.

Our Constitution is a living document that should reflect the values and aspirations of all Americans. It should not be subject to manipulation by a select few who seek to further their own interests at the expense of the majority.

As citizens, it is our responsibility to remain vigilant and informed about the issues that impact our democracy. By understanding the potential consequences of an Article V Convention, we can work toward protecting our democratic principles and ensuring that our Constitution remains a true reflection of the will of the people.

Glenn Johnston
DeLand

No posts to display

1 COMMENT

  1. A convention is nothing more than a formal discussion of the people alive today–the people who are in dire need of discussing our collective situation.

    Interests of a select few? The select few have the money, which is how we’re being enslaving in debt, while they allow the destruction of human culture (corporate status quo/social media/AI). What are the dangers of discussing and debating useful amendments? What is the danger of building national consensus? To the select few it’s dangerous, if they would benefit from it, they would have called it years ago. Instead they fill well-meaning folks with fear about the solution put in our high law for this very moment. Get the facts: foavc.org

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here