To enter into an Article V convention without such preparation is asking for a runaway or hijacked convention. The 100 years of willful neglect, used to place corporations in control of the nation, wherein unconstitutional state legislators were very likely embedded in states to resist pressures for an Article V convention, when America does an Article V, all delegates need to be elected in the states they will represent in an open election. Considering the corruption of elections seen recently, those elections need to be on paper ballots and hand counted.
Americans need to understand that each delegate must agree and pledge to propose and promote ratification of three amendments; ending the abridging of free speech, reforming campaign finance and securing the voting systems and elections.
Once delegates are elected in states they need to work with the people to test and purify state legislations with these fundamental principles to assure that all controlling states are aligned with constitutional intent the people know.
This purification process will be facilitated by a newly re found perspective upon free speech which is deeply rooted in natural law and our human instincts. It will serve to make Americans far more constitutional than they have ever been. It is a doctrine that was known when the framers were creating the constitution, but jealous competition with power removed the written record of it and its origin with Indigenous Americans who developed it for use in democratic self determination.
Through free speech an understanding can be created. From the understanding can come; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
No American parent would deny a society that held and used such principles to the future of their child. We have consensus.
Please bring up points that were missed, elaborate on issues not fleshed out, add ways to make the idea/bill better, suggest a companion for GREATER Raters to consider. Please check your facts, grammar, syntax, punctuation, credit sources and quotes, and keep it under 500 words unless you absolutely cannot—then never more than 700 words. Please keep your criticism constructive. We will likely not print destructive criticism although a well written partisan rant bringing up new issues in the idea/bill or previous Op-eds may be accepted if it ends on a constructive note—especially if it offers an alternative idea/bill.
Shorter "letters" are encouraged that bring a new facet to the subject. The intent of the Op-eds is to fully cover the issue for the kind reader to consider before rating, and not waste their time with redundancy or the dreaded—"people-screaming-at-one-another-while-wearing-earplugs-syndrome." Think of the idea/bill as the base with the Op-eds stacked on top to form a structurally sound argument. The goal here is to have a GREATER US for the greatest number of citizens/neighbors. We may publish your piece without notice—so please only submit completed articles. We may, also, contact you for a rewrite or edit. We might even offer suggestions. It is our intention to fairly present the views of fiscal conservatives, independents, and social liberals—to find the overlap of whole-hearted support (nonpartisan) plus the commonality of the "I-can-live-with-that" (bipartisan).