Search This Blog

Monday, March 12, 2018

We do not need a Convention of States (Response to Rep. Matt Dean co-signing House File 2690)

Post by Leon Moe of Cottage Grove. He's a disabled Vietnam Vet and Washington County Watchdog is proud to share:

There is a national movement to establish a "Convention of States" to amendment the Constitution, including right here in Minnesota with HF 2690One of the State Representatives sponsoring the bill is from Washington County. Representative Matt Dean (R), who is known for his strong fiscal conservative record, as well as championing the reform of MNSure after it killed at least one Minnesotan, Gail Dunker. 38 states are required to assemble the convention according to article 5 of the US Constitution.

(response from Representative Matt Dean to four questions asked at the end of this post)

When they assembled in Philadelphia for the 1st Convention their original intent was to simply amend the Articles of Confederation and they ended up writing a whole new Constitution. Keep that in mind.
A proposed Amendment in HF 2690  is a BBA (Balanced Budget Amendment). Right now we know that Gun Control is a hot topic…could there be a proposal to Amend the 2nd Amendment or a host of other Amendments?  John Malcolm thinks it could happen, he's the Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation ( a source many consider the undisputed expert on the Constitution). They published a paper stating the history and risks of opening a convention of States. Stating it could cause a "Runaway Convention." That there's no rule to say the convention is limited to the topics originally stated in a well intended bill like HF 2690
The Constitution is not the problem…the problem is the miserable failure of our elected representatives to honor their oaths to support and defend the Constitution…on EVERY issue, EVERY time.
One indication of this failure were the awards for voting on the “basis for a constitutionally limited government established to sustain life, liberty, justice, property rights and free enterprise” presented by the LEA (Legislative Evaluation Assembly) 3, repeat 3, out of 134 in the Mn House received awards (Matt Dean included) and none from the Mn Senate. Another indication of this failure is that 30% or the bills passed in the Minnesota legislature in 2017 were MSBs or (Multi Subject Bills), which is a direct violation of the Minnesota State Constitution Article 4, Section 17.. ”No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title”.

If you would be interested in a list of those MSB bills so you can check to see how your rep voted send an email with 2017MSB in the subject line to What kind of an Amendment or alteration to the Constitution could we possibly add that would inspire elected representatives to honor their oaths any more than they do now?

Having witnessed the difficulties and dangers experienced by the first Convention…I should tremble for the result of a second” –James Madison (11/2/1788)

Leon Moe
Cottage Grove

Questions for Representative Matt Dean: 
1.) What's your response regarding the concerns mentioned by some of the greatest constitutional scholars on the dangers of opening a convention of states? Specifically, the potential for a "runaway convention." 

2.) How can our Republican majority State house and Senate be trusted to set limits on the reckless spending of the Federal Government when our own GOP legislature passed an over a billion dollar bonding bill and 30% of the bills passed were multi subject bills (MSBs) in 2017? These MSBs are a direct violation of the Minnesota State Constitution Article 4, Section 17.. ”No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title”.  (One bill, one vote)

3.) Say you get the 38 states to ratify the constitution and the convention goes exactly to plan. Who's to say the changes won't be circumvented just like the other powers of the constitution? (10th amendment to name one) 

4.) What do you say to those who suggest energy would be better spent calling on the feds to honor the current US constitution rather than changing it and having them still ignore it? ie: Sue the federal government for violating the constitution like Texas has. They've won seven law suits against the Obama administration's unconstitutional over reach of federal power.

Answer from Representative Matt Dean:

From: Matt Dean 
Date: Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: Rep Dean. Your Bill on Convention of States

Thanks. I'm glad you emailed me regarding this. I'm also glad you have so seriously thought through the issue and its implications.  I wish more people would. 

Debt will crush our republic through a weakening ability to provide national security. We can not continue to steal from our children and grandchildren especially if that comes at the expense of their liberty.  But that's how much it costs.  I have been convinced that there will come a time when we must push away from the table and sober ourselves. We can do it sooner under our own terms, or later under China's. 

I'm less concerned about a runaway convention than I am with runaway congress. 

The swamp will prevail if we leave it to the congress. You would think that if any congress could cut spending it would be this one. They were put in charge out of frustration of the middle class. They can't even pass a single bill to slow down Obamacare (let alone kill it) All the while congratulating themselves for passing a tax cut that protects corporate loopholes but takes away deductions for average joes. Sheesh.  Anyway that's my rationale. I am always open to new information and an willing to change my position when I learn I am wrong. Your opinion is important to me and I think the issue deserves debate. Thanks again