NC House leaders propose changes to US Constitution

A majority in the North Carolina House agreed on Wednesday to call for a meeting to make changes to the U.S. Constitution, saying the time is now to consider alterations to the federal government’s powers and finances, as well as term limits.

The House voted for a pair of resolutions that would add North Carolina to the list of states that are seeking a national “convention of states” as the Constitution permits.

Thirty-four states must formally support the idea for such a convention to occur. Nineteen states have passed convention resolutions so far, according to a group that lobbies for the idea. Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican, joined House Speaker Tim Moore in a news conference last week to back the proposals.

"One of the things they knew they had to have was a mechanism where the states could hold the federal government accountable if they ever just got out of hand and out of control," Moore said Wednesday on the House floor. "If we don't see that today, I don't know what we've seen. But they can rein that in. Article V was that tool.

Common Cause North Carolina Executive Director Bob Phillips warns the constitution doesn’t give states the power to limit what changes the convention might propose once it’s underway.

"The only time they had a constitutional convention, back in 1787, was where they initially went in with the Articles of Confederation to do some tweaks and then they just rewrote the Constitution," Phillips said in an interview.

Phillips says it’s unclear who the delegates would be, who would choose them, or what rules they would have to follow. They could even repeal constitutional liberties and protections.

"It's frightening and it's not, in our mind, necessary," Phillips said. "This is not good for democracy. It's not good for the people of the country."

However, supporters like state Rep. Jon Hardister, R-Guilford, says it’s all about democracy, because three-quarters of the states — 38 — would have to ratify whatever changes might come out of it.

"This country is not going to tear apart the Constitution or do anything that's going to be antithetical to our Constitution because whatever we come up with is going to be a positive outcome for this country," Hardister said during House debate Wednesday.

The two resolutions now go to the state Senate, where affirmative votes also would be needed for approval. Resolutions aren’t subject to the governor’s veto stamp.

Convention supporters in the state House contend constitutional amendments are needed to rein in out-of-control spending and debt, prevent government overreach and diminish the power of lawmakers.

One resolution focusing solely on term limits passed the House by a vote of 69-48. A second resolution considering amendments to address fiscal restraints and power limitations in Washington, D.C. and on term limits passed 61-55.

The convention proposals largely have been pushed by political conservatives, although a few Democrats voted for one or both resolutions on Wednesday.

But several House Republicans opposed them. Some argue that no limits can be placed upon the scope of a constitutional convention — raising threats that the U.S. Constitution could become the subject of a major overhaul.

Any proposed amendments coming out of a convention would need the support of legislatures in 38 states for ratification.