A Call for a Convention of States

As I mentioned in my last ‘Disturbing Societal Trends’ blog, the burden is really on the State Legislatures to clean up the election irregularity problems – let’s hope they’re motivated!  With Trump out of the White House and now also the loss of the Senate, there are not going to be any opportunities to correct problems from the ‘top-down’ for a while – and, they’re likely to get worse with Biden and his crew.  Constitutionally, the conduct of elections is a State responsibility anyway, not one of the Federal government. 

An important idea that’s been developing mostly in the background now for ten or fifteen years is the Convention of States; you’re probably aware of it.  The goals of a Convention of States meeting are to reduce the federal government’s size, power, and ‘overreach’ and to impose federal fiscal restraints, as well as term limits on members of the Congress.  

Two thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures must agree to call a Convention of States.  Conservatism has been under attack for many years; however, Republicans have done much better on the state level, where they now control both the House and Senate in 30 state legislatures despite President Trump’s loss at the national level.  This is a critical time for states to reassert some control over a run-away federal government. 

A very highly respected constitutional law professor who also serves as a senior advisor to the Convention of States is Rob Natelson.  He recently published the first in a series of five upcoming commentaries in the Epoch Times (the first one is attached below)He talks in his commentary about how the impeachment is a diversion designed to focus public attention away from the election irregularities and prevent correction of the irregularities.  

And he talks about the method whereby the state legislatures can use in calling a Convention of States to correct serious national problems.  Only the states, not the ‘swamp,’ are really motivated to correct federal problems.  In his upcoming installments, he will describe in detail the steps for calling a Convention of States to address election reform, big government, lifetime legislators, federal fiscal runaway, and tax reform (e.g., the replacement of the income tax with a national sales tax like the Fair Tax).  If you’re unfamiliar, here are a few links with information about the Convention of States and the current movement pushing to call one. 




Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG) — https://selfgovern.com/ 

I hope to incorporate these five commentaries, one-by-one as they come out, into this Blog.  They will be very educational and relevant, and will hopefully lead to the understanding and support by Bullets Both Ways supporters of the Convention of States movement.  Supporting and pursuing the Convention of States project is something concrete and very meaningful that Red Teamers can do today to make a hugely important difference during a time when our federal options will be so diminished. 

Author – Captain Jack 


Don’t Be Fooled! Don’t Let Them Divert Us From Ensuring Electoral Integrity! 


January 11, 2021 Updated: January 12, 2021


The public furor over the illegal Capitol break-in is a diversion. Don’t let it stop us from planning and implementing our agenda for the immediate future. 

I’ve been in and around politics for over 50 years. I know a diversion when I see one. Those trying to turn the Capitol incident into an impeachment know there’s no time, or grounds, for impeachment. They also know that President Donald Trump didn’t incite illegal behavior. Anyone can see that by reading his allegedly objectionable words. (I have reproduced them at the end, courtesy of Snopes, a left-leaning website.) 

The goals of this diversion apparently are to (1) move public attention away from election irregularities and the legitimacy of the Biden presidency, (2) forestall honest investigation into those irregularities, and (3) prevent corrective action. 

But we mustn’t be diverted. This is the first essay in a five-part series laying out a two-year agenda for concerned Americans. If adopted, these changes will reduce greatly many of the problems that bedeviled the 2020 election. They also will begin to ameliorate dysfunctions and divisions in our political system. 

This agenda focuses on state legislatures. There’s no hope of making much progress at the federal level, where the system—and perhaps the elections themselves—has been corrupted. In Washington, the power and incentives are stacked against the responsible and productive Americans who make up our country’s backbone. In the federal political game, we always have to start on our own two-yard line and run the football uphill. The other side starts on our 20 and runs downhill. The referee (i.e., the mainstream media) calls every real or imaged penalty against our side and rarely calls one on the opposition. 

That’s why fiscally conservative Americans have not been very successful at the federal level. It’s why, other than Ronald Reagan, there hasn’t been a consistently conservative president for nearly a century. (Trump was conservative on some issues, but liberal fiscally.) 

In most states (sorry, California!), the playing field is very different than at the federal level. Moreover, in the 2020 election, while Trump was purportedly losing, at the state level conservatives were gaining. Republicans (admittedly, not all of whom are conservative) now control both legislative chambers and the governorship in 23 states. In at least seven more, they control both houses of the legislature without the governorship. 

And while it’s not widely known, state legislatures are near the heart of our constitutional system. They have power to force changes in federal operations—in some cases, even without the consent of their governors. 

What follows are the four agenda items. The succeeding essays in this series will elaborate on each. 

Item 1: Constituents must educate state lawmakers about their constitutional role and motivate them to fulfill that role. As mentioned above, state lawmakers have important constitutional responsibilities. They govern the presidential election process, they have much to say about the congressional election process, and they can control the constitutional amendment procedure. State legislatures have been neglecting these duties. That must change. 

Item 2: Reform state election laws. After the 2020 election, the need for this is evident. The details to be addressed vary from state to state. However, it’s clear that the promiscuous use of mail-in ballots is dysfunctional, as well as unconstitutional. That being said, it’s clear that election law change can’t cure all corruption. That’s the reason for Item 3. 

Item 3: This applies in states with histories of big-city or university town-vote corruption. These include six swing states with Republican legislatures: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Their legislatures should adopt resolutions whereby those states’ presidential electors are chosen by congressional district rather than at large. Two states—Maine and Nebraska—do this already, and the Supreme Court has upheld that approach. The consent of the governor isn’t necessary. This reform would effectively cage local corruption to a few congressional districts rather than allow it to infect the presidential election in the entire state. 

Item 4: Persuade as many state legislatures as possible to endorse the “Convention of States” application for constitutional amendments. These amendments would impose federal term limits and restrain federal power. Over the long term, this is the most important of the four agenda items. 

Certain problems in our current system of governance are acknowledged across the political spectrum: severe division among citizens; enormous special interest influence; poorly functioning, and sometimes abusive, government; excessive centralization; and an oligarchy (whether you call it the “deep state” or the “military industrial complex”) not subject to popular control. Only a convention of states—or, in the Constitution’s phrase, a “convention for proposing amendments”—would have both the will and power to propose constitutional reforms to address those problems. Only the state legislatures can ensure a convention is called. 

Each of those four goals is achievable on a playing field where productive Americans, rather than so-called “progressive” interests, have the advantage. And each is a relatively small change with big potential effects. 

More in later essays. 

Postscript: As promised, here are the actual words in President Donald Trump’s speech. Where’s the incitement to violence? 

“After this, we’re going to walk down—and I’ll be there with you—we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down—anyone you want, but I think right here—we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. And we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness, you have to show strength, and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing, and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated—lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your votes heard today. … 

“The best is yet to come. We’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue—I love Pennsylvania Avenue—and we’re going to the Capitol. And we’re going to try and give—the Democrats are hopeless, they never vote for anything, not even one vote—but we’re going to try to give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need any of our help; we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.” 

Robert G. Natelson, a former constitutional law professor, is a senior fellow in constitutional jurisprudence at the Independence Institute in Denver, and a senior adviser to the Convention of States movement. His research articles on the Constitution’s meaning have been cited repeatedly by justices and parties in the Supreme Court. He is the author of “The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant.” 

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.