The first knee-jerk reaction of many freedom fighters to the idea of applying for an Article V amendments convention for the purpose of submitting to the states a national debt relief constitutional amendment is, “The threat of a runaway convention makes it too risky.”

However, those who choose to publically take that position must perform two steps before their opposition can be considered legitimate.

  • Acknowledge the competing risk of continuing down the path our country is on, concluding that the convention is riskier. Unlike speculative concerns about an amendments convention, the threat of a runaway Congress has already been realized. Worse, that’s just a symptom of deeper problems. Having investigated and described many of these, economist Thomas Sowell has arrived at a sobering pessimism about the future of American liberty. Engaging his arguments and widespread similar ones is a prerequisite for judging that the risk of a convention is greater than doing nothing.

Honest people can disagree about this option — but only after becoming informed and acknowledging the competing risks. To put it bluntly, simply declaring or insinuating, “Too risky!” without making an argument based on actual information and a balanced risk assessment is not honest, and therefore not a valid basis to oppose this proposal.


See also:

National Debt Relief Amendment Information Page


Related Articles:

Acton Lecture Series: 'Excuse Me Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism'

Why Can’t Tesla Sell Cars in Michigan?

Thanksgiving Dinner More Expensive for Michiganders Than Surrounding States

Former Energy Regulator Says Bill Would Establish Energy Monopoly

Let's Make a (Special) Deal: Legislators Can't Shake the Habit

Liberty, Prosperity and Humility on Thanksgiving