As perhaps you’ve noticed throughout this series of articles on the events of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, clauses — important clauses — were agreed upon by delegates, only to be completely rewritten when this or that committee was assigned to compile a complete draft of the approved provisions.
It is this unassailable historical truth that gives pause to many thoughtful and educated constitutionalists when the issue comes up of the purported safety of an “amendments convention” or “Article V convention” or “convention of the states” or whatever name the proponents adopt for their desired convention aimed at amending the U.S. Constitution.
[Source.](https://thenewamerican.com/us/politics/constitution/the-convention-of-1787-what-it-did-what-it-was-supposed-to-do-and-what-we-can-learn-from-the-difference/)
>
As perhaps you’ve noticed throughout this series of articles on the events of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, clauses — important clauses — were agreed upon by delegates, only to be completely rewritten when this or that committee was assigned to compile a complete draft of the approved provisions.
>
It is this unassailable historical truth that gives pause to many thoughtful and educated constitutionalists when the issue comes up of the purported safety of an “amendments convention” or “Article V convention” or “convention of the states” or whatever name the proponents adopt for their desired convention aimed at amending the U.S. Constitution.
(post is archived)