By NOAH TABORDA
Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — A renewed effort to call a constitutional convention drew a former U.S. senator, state legislators, and a handful of concerned citizens to a Kansas panel hearing Tuesday to debate the action.
HCR 5027 would, under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, add Kansas to a list of states attempting to call a convention to propose amendments imposing fiscal restraints on the federal government and limiting its jurisdiction. The resolution also calls for limited terms for members of Congress and other officials.
Each state could send up to 10 delegates, and each state would have one vote.
Proponents of the resolution argued there is a growing need for a rebalancing of power between the federal government and the states. Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said Article V was the best avenue to accomplish this goal.
“I don’t think our Founding Fathers would be surprised that the federal government has claimed more than its constitutional share of power,” Santorum said. “They would be surprised that we have not used the most effective tool they gave us for curbing it.”
According to the Convention of States Action, a group backing the idea, 17 states have applied for a convention, and eight more have passed a resolution in one chamber. An identical resolution failed to clear the Kansas Senate last year.
The U.S. Constitution requires that Congress call such a convention if two-thirds of all states, or 34 legislatures, apply. Previous efforts to pass similar resolutions have amassed simple majorities in the Legislature, but a 1974 amendment to the Kansas Constitution requires the approval of two-thirds of both chambers of the Legislature to apply.
However, Rep. Michael Houser, R-Columbus, warned in written testimony to the House Federal and State Affairs Committee that a convention of states could open the door to unforeseen consequences. He said the U.S. Constitution was already in good shape, and if people wanted to amend it, there are safer means.
“Having been in the Legislature for any length of time, one understands and knows that anything is possible in a meeting using a parliamentary format,” Houser said. “With enough votes, rules can be ignored, overruled, changed or new rules be adopted. If you have the votes when using parliamentary procedure, you can do anything you want.”
Opponents of the resolution worried the outcome of a constitutional convention would not reflect the will of Kansans. Blake Branson, the deputy state coordinator for Kansas Campaign for Liberty, echoed Houser, adding that most concerning was the wording of the resolution.
“So long as a ‘fiscal restraint’ or ‘limit’ of power is included in a proposed amendment, even if it is mere window dressing, every part of the Constitution and every issue is on the table,” Branson said. “At the very least, we should ensure that we are careful and exact with our words when altering our Constitution is the goal. This is a flaw too big and too significant to ignore.”