MB, you make some good points. I’m not entirely on board, but if it does go forward, those nine proposals as currently written, plus the absence of anything addressing income tax and direct election of senators, are serious no-go issues for me. They would need revision (and in the case of the 16th and 17th Amendments, addition into the process) before I could support it. IF it’s the better option, I would agree with your logic that the window of opportunity is fast closing. So if it’s going to be done, it needs to be done right. There will be no do-over. We will either be cursed or blessed with what we get.
My concern is not just for the low/no-information voters (what few there are that actually vote anymore). It is with the politicians those voters send to our statehouses and D.C. We should expect them to disregard anything they don’t like even under an amended Constitution if they cannot find a “loophole” as they see it. And that’s my hang up with this process – if it’s on paper but not followed now, we should expect the same the day after the Con-Con process is completed as well. And if we end up with things out of that process that are far worse than we have now (gun control?), those same corrupt politicians would be using their “new, improved” Constitution to enforce those things we may only fear at this point, if they become law through a hijacked Con-Con.
But the would-be new framers need to at least fix the proposals before going forward. I truly am surprised that a former state attorney general and supposedly successful attorney in his prior practice, was not more careful with what he published. And I have to wonder why. I also have to wonder why there’s NO mention of actual tax reform (e.g. repeal of the 16th Amendment), or the severe assault on the 10th Amendment by the passage of the 17th Amendment (direct election of the Senate), when the verbiage in his proposals frequently seems to go toward states’ rights. Fix the fundamental problem, don’t keep applying bandaids. There’s either incompetence going on there, or corruption. Why would I possibly think the latter, though? [No. I don’t trust them. And I guess that’s my real bottom line.]