Indiana  Senate President Pro Tem David Long is calling on states across the  nation to convene a Constitutional Convention as proscribed in Article V  of the US Constitution to curtail the incursion of federal authority  into realms which should remain under individual state control.

According  to published reports here in the Cornfield, Long sees the federal  government seeking to consolidate power and work its will on the people  in a fashion not in keeping with the designs of the Constitution. It  would take two-thirds of state legislatures to approve a bill calling  for such a convention. If enough state lawmakers around the country did  convene a convention, the scope would not be limited, but would allow  for introduction of almost any idea and proposition to become part of  the Constitution.

Long  is reportedly focusing on curbing Congress from overstepping its bounds  in both controlling interstate commerce as well as in taxation. Part of  the rationale on taxation may be due in part over the US Supreme Court  upholding the Affordable Care Act in 2012 on the grounds that the  individual mandate is a tax. Long is a Republican.

While  in some ways a Constitutional Convention sounds appealing especially  when one is a strong supporter of the 10th Amendment, as I am, there are  some dangers and cautions that should be acknowledged. The 10th  Amendment is also known as the States Rights Amendment, which declares  any powers not specifically granted in the Constitution to the federal  government are retained by the states. There is nothing in the  Constitution that would prevent such a gathering from re-writing the  Constitution or moving to repeal some amendments already in place.

I  do believe that we are moving in the wrong direction toward more  central control and less local control. I am not sure that convening a  Constitutional Convention is the answer. When we begin to think in these  terms and begin to move toward such action, we are in a way expressing  that we no longer have faith that our system as envisioned by the  Founding Fathers can continue to work.

Personally  I can see where a convention would rather than bringing unity to the  nation would serve to divide and splinter the country more than it  already is. The camps would divide between liberal states and  conservative states. You would have rural states and urban states  staking claims that neither could see eye-to-eye.

I  understand the frurstration of some lawmakers with what does seem to be  encroachment by Washington into areas which have traditionally been the  state's purview. I would suggest the best course would be not to go the  route of a Constitutional Convention, but rather find quality  candidates to send to Washington.

Just  because a man or woman declares their allegiance to this party or that  party does not mean that person is the best candidate to run for and be  elected to Congress or to the White House. The political parties need to  do a better job in finding suitable candidates to run for elective  office.

Of  course the other issue is we, the voters. We need to do a better job in  researching the people who want to serve. We need to break loose from  political party affiliation and ideological fastidiousness and look at  the person in his or her entirety and make sure we are casting a vote  for the most qualified individual.

From  the Cornfield, while an interesting idea and one which is  constitutionally sound, such a convention has never occurred in our  history. I do not think that now is time to break new ground. Let's fix  what is wrong starting in the voting booth.

http://theindychannel.com/news/senate-president-pro-tem-david-long-wants-states-to-demand-constitutional-convention