FOAVC - Judicial Reform; Term-Limits; Balanced-Budget; Inititive-Referendum Recall; Repeal of Federal Income Tax; One Purpose-per-Bill;
Subjects Inside: Article V Applications  FAQ, Application Counts By Congress, Articles, AVC Legislative Report, CRS Reports, Convention of State, Compact for America, COS, CFA--Which States are Which?, The Historic Record of COS, COS, CFA Laws, COS Articles, CRS Reports on COS/CFA, COS, CFA Financial Records, CFA Financials, COS Financials, COS/CFA Financial Conclusions, John Birch Society, Con-Con, Runaway Convention, Who Called the Convention, Congressional Vote on a "Runaway" Convention, "Obey the Constitution, Only Two More States", Illegal Rescissions, The Phony Burger Letter, The Madison Letter, Fotheringham Exchange, JBS Articles, Sibley Lawsuit, General Interest, Article V.org, Robert Natelson, History of Article V, Counting the Applications, The Numeric Count History, Congressional Decision of May 5, 1789, Development of Article V, The Committee of the Whole, The Committee of Detail, August 30, September 10, Committee of Style, September 15, Official  Government Documents, History of FOAVC, Founders, Audio/Visual, Links, Contact Us, Legal Page, 14th Amendment, The Electoral Process, Packets, Definitions, Numeric, (Applications grouped by numeric count as required by the Constitution),  Same Subject (Applications grouped by amendment subject, not required by the Constitution for a convention call).

Go To Page 5: AC, D, E, F, G   Return to Page Five

Page 5 B--COS, CFA State Laws

The purpose of this page is to present the text of all applications and state laws submitted by the states dealing  a "convention of states" or "compact" to propose amendments. Publication of any application however is subject to publication first appearing in the Congressional Record as proof the application was actually transmitted to Congress. Due to the complexities of some state legislature's web sites, FOAVC  has, in some instances, been unable to locate the appropriate application or legislation. This missing information is noted below. FOAVC would appreciate anyone who can provide a link to the needed information contacting us at questions@foavc.org.

FOAVC believes in the principle of Res Ipsa Louquitur--let the facts speak for themselves. FOAVC also believes people should have the opportunity to make up their minds on an issue based on original material rather than an interpretation by some individual or group. For this reason FOAVC is presenting copies of the actual applications and state laws thus far enacted in regards to COS/CFA. A brief description of the state applications and state law from each state is next to the state's outline. This said however FOAVC feels duty bound to point out some facts about these state laws:

 


600Appointment by the state legislature of convention delegates rather than election by the people (whose election is specifically stated in the law and thus subject to the law) is forbidden by federal law. Federal law makes it a crime to "directly or indirectly, promise any employment [or] position ...provided or or made possible in whole or in part by an Act of Congress...to any person as consideration, favor or reward for any political activity." (Click image left to enlarge).

Obviously, the law is intended to ensure that persons who are "appointed" by the various members of the state legislatures will obey the "instructions" or are close political allies of the politician making the appointment. Politics is all about scratching--"you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours," goes the old saying. It means you do me a political favor, I'll do you one. How would a politician choose someone who he is relatively sure will obey his "instructions" and vote the way he instructs? By knowing that person has done him political favors in the past (or heavily contributed to his political campaign) and, as a reward, appoint him to the position of delegate or commissioner to the convention. Federal law prohibits this from occurring where an act of Congress is involved.
Article V of the Constitution mandates Congress call the convention. Such action is clearly "an Act of Congress." State laws calling for a convention "called by the states" are clearly unconstitutional.


601Federal criminal further provides the term "election" includes "the election of delegates to a constitutional convention for proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States..." (Click image right to enlarge). COS/CFA might argue the state laws which do not permit election by the people and thus are in direct violation of federal law do not apply as the "commissioners" are "elected" by the state legislatures. This is incorrect.

Federal law defines the word "election" by the use of several examples of "elections." These include a "general", "special primary" and "runoff election." The law also describes a "primary election" of delegates to a political convention. All these examples of election described by law share a common trait: all are elections directly involving the American public who directly elects the candidate in question. None of the examples cited involve "election" by state legislators. Further the purpose of an election is to obtain consent from the people directly authorizing a candidate to hold and exercise the powers of a particular office. Without that consent any person occupying that office or attempting to exercise the powers of that office acts illegally as he is not qualified under federal law to hold that office.

As with all other offices and events described in the law, federal law does not make an exception or qualification for the "election" of delegates to a "convention for proposing amendments." The word "election" automatically excludes the appointment by the state legislature and requires direct election by the people of candidates for the office of delegate to a convention for proposing amendments (an Article V Convention). Therefore appointment by state legislature to that office violates federal criminal law. The word "election" as described by the examples of election used in federal law clearly refers to the public event routinely associated with the word "election." That word was equally, and deliberately was intended to, apply to the election of Article V Convention delegates.

Further, federal law describes the term "candidate" for office as a person having "taken the action necessary under the law of a State to qualify himself for election..." All the state laws shown below establish certain minimum standards a person must meet in order to be selected by the state legislature (but not the American people) to the office of delegate or commissioner to a Convention of States or Compact for America convention. The person "appointed" to the COS/CFA office may have taken the actions necessary under state law to qualify himself for the appointment but under federal law is not legally qualified to assume office because federal law mandates the candidate must be "elected" by the people not appointed by the state legislature.

Since the "appointed" candidates from the various states are illegal under federal law and as the courts have ruled states operate under federal law when involved in the amendatory process, this means any "commissioner" appointed by the state legislature who has not been elected by the people cannot legally exercise the authority granted the convention in the Constitution meaning the COS/CFA convention the state laws contemplate is illegal under federal law. Therefore that convention cannot legally propose amendments to the United States Constitution as the people have not consented through election to authorize those delegates to have that authority as described by federal law.

241242The removal of the right to vote when otherwise guaranteed by historic intention of the Federal Convention of 1787, the Supreme Court and federal law raises another issue--deprivation of civil rights. This includes not only the removal of the right to vote from the American people but also the threat of felony prosecution against convention "commissioners" (or whatever term is used in the various state laws to describing convention delegates controlled by the state legislatures) for exercising their right of vote at the convention.

Federal law (click images left to enlarge) make it illegal to "threaten or intimate any person ... in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same." Further federal law makes it illegal "under color of any law" to willfully subject any person to "deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or the laws of the United States...to different punishments...than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens."

There is no law in the United States or in any state which "punishes" a citizen for voting in an election (except for these state laws) by depriving them of the right to vote in that election which is guaranteed by federal law. There is no law which "punishes" an officeholder in any office for voting as he thinks best (except in these state laws) by depriving that officeholder of his right of vote and arresting him for exercising a right  guaranteed by provisions in the Constitution. As federal laws create the right to vote on convention delegates state laws which prohibit or prevent the "free exercise or enjoyment" of that right conflict with federal civil rights law.

Clicking on the icon will bring up a page showing the material obtained from the official records of the state legislature. In the matter of Convention of States laws and applications FOAVC has elected to present all applications or laws (recognized or not by Convention of States) in which the application or law refers to a "convention of states." In some instances FOAVC will reference material within the official documents it believes may be of interest to the reader. The files presented are updated as new information is received.



COS

Alabama

Alabama




The state of Alabama enacted HJR 112 on May 22, 2015 as it COS application. The resolution requires state laws regulating convention delegates. HJR 112 requests the political agenda expressed by COS as described elsewhere in this website.








Alabama








Despite the requirements of HJR 112, FOAVC has been unable to locate any Alabama state law dealing with the regulation of convention delegates.














Alaska


Alaska
The state of Alaska enacted a "Countermand" application under HCR14 as its "convention of states" application which was permanent enrolled as Legislative Resolution 49 on September 15, 2016. Despite claims by COS that Alaska passed a "convention of states" application Resolution 46 only addresses a "Countermand" or nullification amendment. It does use the term "convention of states" but only in its opening remarks. FOAVC has been unable to locate any state record showing the Alaska state legislature has, in fact, passed a "convention of states" application supporting the COS political agenda.



Alaska
The state of Alaska enacted Legislative Resolution 46 which was permanently enrolled on September 23, 2016. The resolution deals with the regulation of convention delegates from the state of Alaska to a convention for proposing amendments. The delegates are "representatives of the legislature" and therefore not considered "free agents" and only are "authorized" to complete the terms specified in Resolution 46. Delegates are strictly limited only to support a "Countermand" or nullification amendment meaning they are not authorized to support neither the COS or CFA agenda.


Arizona

Arizona



On March 15, 2017 the state of Arizona enacted HCR 2010 applying for a convention of states. The application matches the political agenda of Convention of States.






Missing


As of the date of this page the state of Arizona has not enacted legislation regulating convention delegates.




Florida

Florida


The state of Florida enacted SM 476, an application for a convention for proposing amendments on May 9, 2014. According to a COS news release COS claims this application as COS application. However while the application does support the political agenda of COS, it contains no language referring to a "convention of states" but instead refers to an  "Article V Convention."





Florida

The state of Florida enacted CS/HB 609 on July 1, 2014 enrolled in Florida Code as Title 50, Section 38. The law establishes the regulation of convention delegates and provides for criminal felony prosecution (page 9) (felony in the third degree) of up to five years in prison or a fine up to $5,000 for failure of any convention delegate to follow instructions of the state legislature. The law calls for delegate selection by the legislature.





Georgia

Georgia



The state of Georgia enacted SR 736 as its COS application on April 22, 2014. The application matches the political agenda of COS.






Georgia


The state of Georgia amended Georgia State Code, Title 50, adding Section 38 dealing with a Compact for a Balanced Budget on April 12, 2014. As far as FOAVC can determine there is no corresponding state law addressing any COS convention. Apparently convention delegates from Georgia to a COS convention will be regulated by state laws intended to regulate the CFA compact. The compact requires delegate selection by the state legislature only.




Indiana

Indiana




The state of Indiana enacted SJR 14 as its COS application on March 17, 2016. The application matches the political agenda of COS.








Indiana



The state of Indiana enacted two bills, SB 224 and SB 225 on May 7, 2013. The two bills combined to add a new section to the Indiana Code IC 2-8 and IC 2-8.2. IC 2-8 deals with the selection of convention delegates by the state legislature, criminal felony prosecution (page 3) (a Class D felony of up to three years in prison and a possible fine not to exceed $10,000) and the creation of an "Advisory" committee made up state officials to "advise" delegates as to whether a contemplated vote violates state law.






Indiana




The state of Indiana's second bill, SB 225 created IC 2-8.2 in Indiana Code. IC 2-8.2 defines the qualifications for delegate, their oath office and other associated duties.







Louisiana

Louisiana


The state of Louisiana enacted as its COS application, SCR 52 on June 7, 2016. The application matches the agenda of COS.





Missing

FOAVC has been unable to locate any Louisiana state law dealing with convention delegates.





Michigan

Michigan


The Michigan State Legislature enacted its COS application, SJR V, on March 31, 2014. The term "convention of states" is mentioned in the application but does not match the political agenda of Convention of States. The application instead only deals with a balanced budget amendment. The political organization Convention of States does not count this application in its total of "convention of states" applications.





Missing

FOAVC has been unable to locate any Michigan state law dealing with convention delegates.





Missouri

Missouri
On May 12, 2017 the General Assembly of Misouri enacted SCR 4, an application calling for a convention of states. The application described certain "understandings": (1) Congress limited to the ministerial function of calling a convention; (2) the call may only occur when applications of the same subject from two thirds of the state legislatures occur; (3) Congress has no power to regulate delegates; (4) the General Assembly "may recall its delegates at any time for breach of their duties or violations of their instructions."



Missing

FOAVC has been able to locate any Missouri state law dealing with convention delegates.





North Dakota

North Dakota

On March 27, 2017 the North Dakota State Legislature enacted HCR 3006 applying for a "convention of states." The application matches the political agenda of Convention of States.




Missing

FOAVC has been unable to locate any North Dakota state law dealing with regulation of convention delegates.





Oklahoma

OklahomaThe state of Oklahoma enacted SJR 4 as its COS application on April 27, 2016. The application is unique in that combines two applications in the same measure. The first, found in sections 2 through 5 is a general balanced budget amendment and specifies (page 3) that the application is to be aggregated with 28 other state applications. The second, found in sections 6 through 9 calls for a COS convention following the political agenda of COS and the application is to be aggregated with the application of six other COS states.


Missing


FOAVC has been unable to locate any Oklahoma state law dealing with convention delegates.




South Carolina

South CarolinaSouth Carolina

On December 13, 1832, the state of South Carolina was the first state to submit an application for a "convention of states" convention. The political organization Convention of States does not recognize this application as a "convention of states" application despite the fact the phrase "convention of states" was first used in this application.



Missing

FOAVC has been unable to locate any South Carolina law dealing with convention delegates.




Tennessee

Tennessee
The state of Tennessee enacted as its COS application SJR 67 on February 9, 2016. The application follows the political agenda of COS.


Tennessee
The state of Tennessee enacted HB 1379 on May 22, 2014 regulating selection by the state legislature of delegates to an Article V Convention. The law provides for a Class E felony for any delegate failing to follow "instructions" of the state legislature. A Class E felony is punishable by one to six years in prison as well as a fine up to $3,000.

Texas

Texas

On May 5, 2017 the Texas State Legislature enacted SJR 2 applying for an Article V Convention call. While the application reflects the political agenda of the political organization "Convention of States" nowhere in the application is the phrase "convention of states" used. Nevertheless the political organization "Convention of States" has claimed the application as being a "convention of states" application.




Texas
On June 6, 2017, the Texas State Legislature enacted SB 21 for the purpose of regulating convention delegates.  The law calls for appointment of all delegates by the state legislature, recall of delegates who fail to follow legislative instructions, and provides for a "state jail felony" for delegates failing to following such instructions.




Wyoming
 
Wyoming

On March 3, 2017 the legislature of the state of Wyoming enacted HJR0002 calling for a "convention of states" for the limited purpose of considering a balanced budget. As with other state applications which do not reflect the political agenda of "Convention of States", the political organization Convention of States has not counted the application as one of its "convention of states" applications.




Missing


FOAVC has been unable to locate any Wyoming law dealing with convention delegates.






CFA

Alaska

Alaska

The "Compact for a Balanced Budget" regulates the convention, delegates and ratification and therefore requires no other legislative act by the state. The state of Alaska enacted the CFA compact as HB 284 on July 21, 2014.




Arizona
Arizona



The "Compact for a Balanced Budget" regulates the convention, delegates and ratification and therefore requires no other legislative act by the state. The state of Arizona enacted the CFA compact as HCR 2002 on March 30, 2017.




Georgia


Georgia



The state of Georgia enacted the CFA compact as HB 794 which regulates convention, delegates and ratification on April 12, 2014.






Mississippi

Mississippi




The state of Mississippi enacted the CFA compact as SB2389 which regulates convention, delegates and ratification on March 13, 2015.







North Dakota

North Dakota

The state of North Dakota enacted the CFA compact as EHB 1138 which regulates convention, delegates and ratification on April 1, 2015.  



Continued to Page Five C

Page Last Updated: 24 AUGUST 2017