1. Article 5 provides two ways to amend our Constitution: Congress (1) proposes amendments and sends them to the States for ratification (this was done with our existing 27 Amendments); or (2) calls a convention for proposing amendments if two thirds of the State Legislatures apply for it. We've never had a convention under Article V – they are dangerous! 
2. But today, various well-funded factions are lobbying State Legislators to ask Congress to call an Article V convention. One faction, the "Convention of States Project" (COS), claims to be for limited government and is marketing the convention to appeal to conservatives. COS claims (falsely) that our Framers told us to amend the Constitution when the federal government violates the Constitution. 3. COS's claim is absurd – it's like saying that since people violate the Ten Commandments, God should amend the Ten Commandments.
4. COS's claim is false. Not only did our Framers never say what COS claims,
- Our Constitution already limits the power and jurisdiction of the federal government to a small handful of enumerated powers (they are listed on this one page chart). Furthermore, it's impossible to rein in the federal government with amendments because when the feds usurp powers not delegated, they are ignoring the existing constitutional limitations on their powers.
- All of the proposed amendments produced by COS and their sympathizers markedly INCREASE the powers of the federal government by delegating powers the federal government has already usurped; by granting new powers to the federal government; by transferring power from Representatives elected by the People to the Deep State; or by stripping States of their existing sovereign powers.  See:
Mark Levin's "liberty" amendments: legalizing tyranny,
COS Project's "simulated convention" dog and pony show and what they did there,
The "Regulation Freedom" Amendment and Daniel Webster,
Parental Rights Amendment: Selling You and Your Kids Out to Big Government
Wolf PAC's Amendment for "fair and free elections," and
5. So what's the real agenda of those (primarily George Soros and the Kochs) who are financing the push for a convention? A convention provides the opportunity to replace our existing Constitution with a new constitution which moves us into a completely new system of government, such as the North American Union (NAU). Under the NAU, Canada, the United States, and Mexico are economically and politically integrated and a Parliament and combined militarized police force are set up over them. 
The phrase within Article V, "a Convention for proposing Amendments," doesn't restrict the Delegates to the Convention to merely proposing Amendments. Our Declaration of Independence recognizes that a People have the "self-evident Right" to throw off their government and set up a new government.  We've already invoked that Right twice: In 1776 we invoked it to throw off the British Monarchy; and in 1787, James Madison invoked it to throw off our first Constitution, the Articles of Confederation (AOC), and set up a new Constitution [the one we now have] which created a new government.This is what happened:
There were defects in the AOC, so on Feb. 21, 1787, the Continental Congress called a convention to be held in Philadelphia
"for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation"
But the Delegates ignored their instructions from Congress, and similar instructions from their States  and wrote a new Constitution which created a new government. Furthermore, the new Constitution had its own new mode of ratification: Whereas amendments to the AOC had to be approved by the Continental Congress and all of the then 13 States;  the new Constitution provided at Article VII thereof, that it would be ratified when only 9 States approved it.
And in Federalist No. 40 (15th para), James Madison, who was a Delegate to the Federal "amendments" Convention of 1787, invoked that same Right as justification for the Delegates' ignoring their instructions and writing a new Constitution which created a new government. 6. If we have a convention today, the Delegates will have that same power to get rid of our second Constitution and impose a third Constitution. New Constitutions are already prepared or in the works! One of them, the Constitution for the Newstates of America, is ratified by a national referendum (See Art. XII, §1). The States don't vote on it – they are dissolved and replaced by regional governments answerable to the new national government.
7. So why was the convention method added to Article V? The Anti-federalists wanted it added because they wanted another convention so they could get rid of the Constitution just drafted. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton understood that a people have the right to meet in convention and draft a new constitution whether the convention method were in Article V or not. So this is why Madison and Hamilton went along with adding the convention method to Article V; and this is why, as early as April 1788, they and our future first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay started warning against another convention.
8. Using the pretext of merely getting amendments, the Globalists want a convention so they can complete their coup against us and get a new Constitution which moves us into the New World Order.
9. States should rescind the applications they have already submitted to Congress.
 See Michael Farris's quote HERE. None of our Framers said such a silly thing as Farris claims! Our Framers actually said the purpose of Amendments is to remedy defects in the Constitution; and they all knew that the real purpose of a convention is to get another constitution.
 IGNORANCE is our problem. Americans don't know what our Constitution says. Can you recite by heart the enumerated powers granted to Congress over the Country at Large?
 Mark Levin's amendment to "grant the States authority to check Congress" [p. 169 of "The Liberty Amendments"] provides that three-fifths of the state legislatures may vote to override a federal statute and certain Executive Branch regulations provided that the States do so within a certain time period. When that time period has expired, the States are forever prohibited from exercising the override.Levin's amendment would strip the States of their long recognized individual natural right – much written about by our Framers – to NULLIFY all acts of any Branch of the federal government which violate our Constitution. See Nullification: The Original Right of Self-Defense and What Should States Do When the Federal Government Usurps Power?
 The federal term limits amendment would transfer power from US Senators and Representatives (elected by the People) to the Deep State (a massive body of nameless, faceless, and unelected bureaucrats who would become the PERMANENT AND TOTALLY UNACCOUNTABLE GOVERNING BODY).
 In Federalist No. 40 (15th para), James Madison says the Delegates knew that reform such as was set forth in the new Constitution was necessary for our peace and prosperity. They knew that sometimes great and momentous changes in established governments are necessary – and a rigid adherence to the old government takes away the "transcendent and precious right" of a people to "abolish or alter their governments as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness," ... "and it is therefore essential that such changes be instituted by some INFORMAL AND UNAUTHORIZED PROPOSITIONS, made by some patriotic and respectable citizen or number of citizens...."© Publius Huldah
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.