{"id":460,"date":"2011-10-25T01:00:47","date_gmt":"2011-10-25T01:00:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jlpp.org\/old_blog\/?p=460"},"modified":"2011-10-25T01:00:47","modified_gmt":"2011-10-25T01:00:47","slug":"tea-occupy-forget-99-and-53-lets-agree-on-23","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/2011\/10\/25\/tea-occupy-forget-99-and-53-lets-agree-on-23\/","title":{"rendered":"Tea & Occupy: Forget 99% and 53%, Let\u2019s Agree on 2\/3."},"content":{"rendered":"\"\"<\/a>Many American citizens are familiar with the Constitutional amendment process to the extent they see it as exclusively within the federal legislature\u2019s power. In fact, there is an alternate path\u2014one that has never been successfully used. Fear of use of the alternative, though, has forced Congress into action at several critical junctures in American history.<\/span>\n\nNo discussion of the Article V Convention\u2019s utility at present would be complete without reference to Lawrence Lessig and Mark McKinnon\u2019s work in the movement. A <\/span>prominent liberal political activist<\/a> and Harvard Law School professor<\/a>, Lessig has been vigorously advocating the Article V Convention as a medium for change. Alongside him stands the conservative political strategist Mark McKinnon<\/a>, and despite opposing political stances, Lessig and McKinnon launched the organization Call A Convention<\/a> a few years ago with a shared purpose. The organization\u2019s call-to-action is invoking Article V’s lesser-known path<\/a> to amendments:\n\n
\u201cArticle V of the Constitution gives the states the power to call for a Constitutional Convention. To do so, two-thirds of the states\u201434 out of 50 state legislatures\u2014must pass an application calling for a Convention. If enough states pass this simple resolution, then Congress must call a Convention so that states can propose amendments to the Constitution.\u201d<\/em><\/blockquote>\n\nGeorge Mason, Virginia\u2019s delegate to the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787 (the last time we had one), argued for this alternate route<\/a> by pointing out that if the only way to amend was by the federal legislators\u2019 consent, \u201cthey may abuse their power, and refuse their consent on that very account.\u201d The point is highly relevant today given widespread rumors concerning Congress\u2019s own employment perks. While several of these rumors are false, it is true that our Congressmen and women are entitled to a pension after one term of service<\/a>; moreover, that pension doesn\u2019t get taken away even if they become criminals! The most egregious example of this is the infamous Randy \u201cDuke\u201d Cunningham\u2014who admitted to taking millions in bribes from defense contractors but is still receiving his pension<\/a>. After the scandal broke, Senator John Kerry proposed an Act<\/a> in Congress<\/em> designed to revoke pensions for members of Congress<\/em> who commit certain offenses. A noble effort, but of course, it didn\u2019t pass.\n\nTherein lies the problem. Congress has become the big, broken arm in this country that serves large corporations with special interests rather than the American people with broad interests. Perhaps the most convenient trick Congress has carried out on Americans is using their \u2018endorsements\u2019 to pit Tea Partiers against Occupiers of Wall Street<\/strong>. Why? Because a united front is the only way we can change the system once and for all\u2014the system that favors Congress<\/em>.\n\nTo learn more about Article V Conventions, check out this op-ed<\/a> by Lessig and McKinnon over at The Daily Beast.","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

How do you wake a 200-year-old sleeping giant, the Article V Constitutional Convention? The media is abuzz with bickering between two political gangs: the members of the 53% versus members of the 99%.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":461,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[162,368,938,995,1125,1283,1509],"class_list":["post-460","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-student-blogs","tag-article-v","tag-constitutional-convention","tag-lawrence-lessig","tag-mark-mckinnon","tag-occupy-wall-street","tag-randy-duke-cunningham","tag-tea-party"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/460","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=460"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/460\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/461"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=460"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=460"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=460"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}