As you heard, and what is now almost ancient history in American time, last week the 112th Congress read the Constitution of the United States. If you were busy that morning, here's what you missed.
Before the reading, a Rep Inslee from Washington inquires about what words of the Constitution will be read:
Rep Goodlatte of Virginia gets around to saying:
This morning, for the first time in the history of the House of Representatives we will read aloud the full text of the Constitution of the United States. We hope this will inspire many more Americans to read the Constitution. The text we are reading today reflects the changes to the document made by the twenty-seven amendments to it. Those portions superceded by amendment will not be read....
Rep Goodlatte says the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress was consulted in regards to which portions of the Constitution would not be read. Of course the meme out on the Internet was that the parts about slavery would not be read, but they left out another part.
At 38:39 of the video Rep Nadler of New York reads the second clause of Article IV, Section 3. The next Rep to read is Fortenberry of Nebraska who begins mid-sentence halfway into Article V, therefore Article IV, Section 4 is not read, nor is the first half of Article V. Here's what they left out:
Article IV, Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States....
Why do you think the 112th Congress did not read these lines of the Constitution when they've never been superceded by amendment? Was Rep Goodlatte lying when he said only portions superceded by amendment would not be read, or was he somehow mistaken? Did folks at the Library of Congress somehow mistakenly remove these portions?
To those who hold up the argument that if we convoked the Article V Convention, that corporate forces which currently control governance would take it over, does this reading of the Constitution mean anything to you? Isn't this evidence the establishment and the corporate forces which control it want to officially delete the idea of a national convention? Why would they do that if it could so easily be utilized to consolidate their power?
And why wouldn't the media or our more popular blogs be commentating on this deletion? Why wouldn't the President, a former professor of Constitutional law, not comment on this deletion?
I like the fact these portions--specifically the convention clause--were not read. It means it's still a threat, if not more of a threat than ever before.
To paraphase President Lincoln--it doesn't matter what the Congress or Court say the Constitution means, only what the people say it means. If we get a tipping-point saying the Constitution means were going to now hold a convention, we will, and the Constitution will be revived, restored, and once again obeyed.
Time will tell.
In regards to the recent shooting of a member of Congress, my thoughts are with her and I'm hoping, dearly, for her recovery. The fact she's not dead is a miracle and I hope this event unfolds to be much more than just a high-profile incident of violence.
