Article V: An Appeal to Justice and Consanguinity

The Constitutional Convention of 1787

The Constitutional Convention of 1787

The topic of a Convention of States is a polarizing one. The movement and debate, is largely being held within conservative schools of thought. Article V of the Constitution has been historically interpreted as the Founders provision for regulating an out of control federal government. However, the idea of an Article V convention has met fervent opposition from many conservatives.

The most prominent opposition seems to stem from a natural human fear of the unknown. We all know that our country is in dire straits and nearing a turning point in our history yet we do not know which way America will turn. As of right now, Congress is sitting on their hands and trading our country’s prosperity for another term in office and better pension plans. In order for our country to prosper, we must balance our budget and limit the periods of time that our elected officials can enjoy in Washington. Who really expects Congress to vote on these measures themselves? The previously stated propositions are just two of many that may be proposed at a Convention of States.

For those conservatives who are skeptical that anything constructive can be accomplished, a better understanding of the Article is necessary. After the convention, the proposed amendments would be sent to the legislatures of the 50 states to be voted on. The amendments then must receive the votes of three-fourths of the states. Although this might prove challenging, it should be noted that as of January 31, 2014, 27 states had Republican controlled legislatures, with an additional 6 split legislatures.[1] It is not entirely unreasonable to predict a successful amending of the constitution.

I believe that an Article V convention is currently the best avenue for correcting our country’s ways. However, many discard the idea of a convention and offer different solutions for the American people’s hardships. Among these, there have been murmurings of secession. For the sake of brevity, I will say that I am not opposed to the idea of secession. However, the thought of seceding from the Union that I have lived all my life, rather than first attempting a Convention of States, is somewhat repulsive to me.

South Carolina first threatened to secede in 1832, almost twenty years prior to its secession. The people of South Carolina did not finalize their action until they felt they had exhausted every means of peaceably pursuing their cause. To overlook the Convention of States, would be a negligence of duty inherent to every American.

Secession is a last resort and every other option should be tried until no other option is present. If eventually “it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with one another,”[2] I will serve knowing that I did everything in my power to preserve liberty in these United States.

Woodrow Wilcox


Learn more about your Constitution with John and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.




This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

John Heidisch is an 18 year-old who has been born and raised in Florida. He was a co-founder of the original campus club, the American Club, at Spanish River High School in Boca Raton. John has helped begin American Clubs in public schools nationwide in cooperation with Institute on the Constitution, an organization run by former presidential candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka.
John Heidisch
View all posts by John Heidisch
Johns website

Comments are closed.