Talk:Constitutional convention (political meeting)
|WikiProject Politics||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Move from "Constitutional Convention"
I moved this page from "Constitutional Convention", moved the page "Constitutional convention" to "Constitutional convention (political custom)" and redirected both "Constitutional Convention" and "Constitutional convention" to Constitutional convention (disambiguation). Capitalization does not distinguish between the two uses of the phrase. "Constitutional Convention" is used for the political meeting only when referring to a specific constitutional convention. Mateo SA | talk 02:20, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
- The discussions in this section refer to the fact that this page was originally located at Constitutional Convention, and that the page Constitutional convention (political custom) was originally located at Constitutional convention.
In the United States, the Constitutional Convention was the meeting of representatives from every state to write the Constitution. This meaning seems different from what is being written here. We need a separate article with a capital "C". Does someone have some insights into this? -- Zoe
I think that there are various possible nomenclatures in Alexandria, Virginia it is called the Federal Convention of 1787, this is also the name given to it by the Avalon Project at Yale University. However some people do call it the Constitutional Convention of 1787 such as those who have contributed to United States Constitution. Reminds me of the joke about Canadians. What do they do when they go to Heaven? Organize a convention. (I'm allowed to tell this as I am a Canadian.) This is already an orphan called Constitutional Convention that has been around for months. Alex756
Um, the US section is wrong, horribly, re House members. The Constitution is quite clear that they have to live in the district they represent.
Precisely how one defines "live", however, is another question entirely. --Penta 02:28, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
How would we go about calling for a new constitutional convention in the United States? Suppose we wanted to consider an amendment to disband the union. It has been a grand experiment, but on many levels we must accept the fact that the experiment is a dismal failure. Can 'We, the People' propose an end to it? J. R.
- There have been proposals for a Second Constitutional Convention from various scholars such as Sanford Levinson, Larry Sabato, Richard Labunski, and others. Anybody can propose anything; but there's lots of inertia for continuing the United States under the current Constitution; the chances that any major changes to the structure will come are small. But I agree there are serious problems. --Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:59, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Clearing some stuff up
There have also been all 50 US states which have passed resolutions through their state legislatures calling for a new Constitutional Convention, more than the two-thirds required by Article V.
That line is totally unclear. Perhaps the person who wrote it, or someone who knows what he was trying to say, could rephrase.
Representatives do not have to live in the District they represent, but must be in the State; Article I, Section 2, Clause 2:
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not ... be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
- Yes, however, its pretty much unanimous that states impose their own requirements, including residing within their district, although as some state attorney generals have stated, "residency is a state of mind."220.127.116.11 06:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
There is provision to call a new Constitutional Convention contained in Article V of the US Constitution that requires the consent of 2/3 of the States to call for such a Convention. I'm not sure exactly what the legal status of a Constitutional Amendment to disband the Union would be, but I suspect it would be unconstitutional since it is anti-constitutional. Much like the Articles of Confederation, I suspect the Union would just disband by the virtue of the States no longer sending representatives to the federal government.
When discussing US Constitutional conventions, the Article is horrifically misguided; It takes what are political conventions such as Senate Leaders not campaigning against one another and calls them constitutional conventions, nor is a televised debate a constitutional convention but a political one.
When I have some time over the next couple of days I will go over the US section and update it. --New Progressive 09:18, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Political conventions are held by parties, but states can hold constitutional conventions to amend their own state constitutions.18.104.22.168 06:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Constitutional Convention of a trade union
Other wikipedia pages say that prohibition was repealed by convention.
United States: Annapolis Convention (1786), which proposed what became the Philadelphia Convention (1787) – Drafted the United States Constitution for ratification by the states. Article V of the constitution sets forth a mechanism whereby future constitutional conventions can be held. The constitution has been amended several times since the Philadelphia Convention, but never (as of 2011) by this method http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_convention_(political_meeting)
Congress may require ratification by special convention. The convention method has been used only once, to approve the 21st Amendment (repealing prohibition, 1933). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_constitution#Article_Five:_Amendments — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdavidg (talk • contribs) 01:03, 20 April 2011 (UTC)