Constitutional Convention to Stop Federal Income Taxes-Tea Parties Phase Two

On 4-23-09 Randy E. Barnett wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal titled The Case for a Federalism Amendment. He writes that states can resist federal power short of secession which Texas seems ready to do. Article V provides that, "on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states: Congress " shall call a convention for proposing amendments" To become law, it takes ratification of three-fourths of the states. 

Normally, it would work like this. States can petition Congress for a convention to propose a specific amendment. Congress can stop the convention by proposing the amendment to the states before the convention happens. Barnett goes on to say one proposal would be to repeal the 16th Amendment enacted in 1913 that authorized a federal income tax. The threat of this could move Congress to make radical changes in the tax code, like a flat tax, a simplified tax, a sales tax to replace income tax, etc. 

Is it a radical idea to think two thirds of the states would vote for a Constitutional Convention? Look at the Red and Blue states in the last presidential election. The two thirds are there if someone pushes to get  them to agree. It is the only leverage the rest of the country has against the East and West coasts. They have the population and the power to elect the president. They have the electoral votes, but the opposition has a  majority of states, more than enough to force a constitutional convention. 

The media and the Democrats think the Tea Parties were a bunch of fools. The next step for the Tea Parties should be to get the movement going for a constitutional convention to force a change in income tax laws at the Federal level.

Google the red states in the last presidential election and see who many you think might vote for a constitutional convention. Two thirds could be done.