After almost a decade of insisting that Congress will never term-limit itself by proposing a constitutional
amendment, US Term Limits (USTL) did a 180 in 2024—apparently to sidestep the “runaway convention”
objection. Now they insist there won’t be a convention—so it can’t run away! Either way, USTL’s solution
to save America is for State Legislatures to vote to pass USTL’s applications asking Congress to call a
convention under Art. V.
USTL lobbyist Constantin Querard testified in
Alaska: “While it’s an Article V application, this issue
is never going to a convention. Our goal is NOT a
convention. We’re gonna do what’s worked for the last
240 years. And that is to use the process to pressure
Congress to write the Amendment itself.” (Emphasis
added.) 1
North Carolina State Sen. Todd Johnson, in presenting
the USTL application to a Senate committee, agreed:
“…As history has proven, a convention on (term limits) or any issue is highly unlikely to ever actually
happen…just as occurred with the 17th, 21st, and 22nd Amendments to the US Constitution—as the number
of states signed-on approaches the required 34 states, Congress decides to take action…because they
ultimately want the control over the Amendment.”2
Meanwhile, the Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) groups are selling the same false narrative:
Idaho State Sen. Doug Ricks (R), testified3 that “[The Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA)
Campaign’s] main goal is NOT to call a convention. … [It] intends to use the threat of a
convention achieved at 33 states to force Congress to act and propose their own BBA.”
Loren Enns, President of Balanced Budget Now, echoed Ricks at the same Idaho
hearing, “Nobody really wants a convention, if it can be avoided.”4
The new narrative credits states’ pressure from A5C applications for Congress’s proposing the Bill of
Rights, presidential tenure, women’s right to vote, electing US Senators by popular vote, repeal of
prohibition, etc.
But history proves no such thing. There is virtually no correlation between States’ passing
applications and Congress’s proposing related Amendments! See Table on page 2.
Passing Art. V convention applications appears to have played a role in Congress’s proposing the 17th
Amendment. But state applications to Congress were too few in number to have played a role in any other
Amendment. Moreover, several applications came close to passing in the required number of states,
without Congress’s passing an Amendment.
Playing chicken with Congress isn’t a good gamble. And State Legislators who vote for applications while
trusting that Congress will never call a convention, are risking our Constitution.
1 Testimony (Querard) @ 03:11:35, Alaska House State Affairs Committee on HJR 13 (Term Limits), Feb. 1, 2024.
2 Transcript (Johnson) before the North Carolina Senat
2024.
3 Testimony (Ricks) @ 05:30 before the Idaho Senate (Standing) Judiciary & Rules Committee, SCR 115 (BBA), Mar. 1, 2024.
Enter hearing information in drop down menus.
4 Testimony (Enns) @ 09:00 before the Idaho Senate (Standing) Judiciary & Rules Committee, SCR 115 (BBA), Mar. 1, 2024.
Same link as above, after Ricks.
5 According to the unofficial Article V Library, the highest number of States that ever held non-rescinded applications on the
subject at the same time; in parentheses is the # of States needed to apply at the time (2/3 of the States). Note that Congress
determines which applications are valid in order to count the number of States that applied—not the Article V Library or the
convention lobby.