MONTANA Emergency Alert! Contact Senate Republicans!

Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman

Janine Hansen, 775-397-6859, director@nevadafamilies.org

www.eagleforum.org. eagle@eagleforum.org

March 24, 2025

Please share with Friends and Family.

We need your help!

 

Montana Emergency Alert!

 

The promoters of an Article V Constitutional Convention are desperate. They are bringing Florida’s Governor DeSantis into Montana on Monday, March 24, after his stop in Idaho to help force a vote on SJ4 on a Constitutional Convention on a Balanced Budget Amendment. (See below why a Balanced Budget Amendment won’t work.)

 

Supreme Court Justice Scalia called it a “horrible idea” to hold a constitutional convention in the age of special interests. “Once you get those people together, you never know what they’re going to do,”

 

MESSAGE: Please vote no on SJ4, the Article V Constitutional Convention for a Balanced Budget. Please do what’s best for Montana. The only way to balance the budget is to raise taxes or cut spending. An Article V Convention cannot be limited to a single subject. It will open the Constitution to unlimited changes. (Or better yet write your own message.)

 

Please Email All Republican Senators:

ealbus@nemont.net,  Brad.Barker@legmt.gov,  David.Bedey@legmt.gov,  lynbennett406@yahoo.com,  Marta.Bertoglio@legmt.gov,  Larry.Brewster@legmt.gov,  Ed.Buttrey@legmt.gov,  byrneforhd11@gmail.com,  curt4787@gmail.com,  Lee.Deming@legmt.gov,  Julie.Dooling@legmt.gov,  Neil.Duram@legmt.gov,  Sherry.Essmann@legmt.gov,  Jodee.Etchart@legmt.gov,  Terry.Falk@legmt.gov,  Paul.Fielder@legmt.gov,

 John.Fitzpatrick@legmt.gov,  fitzpatricks@bresnan.net,  Jane.Gillette@legmt.gov  Steven.Gist@legmt.gov,  randynformontana@gmail.com , Caleb.Hinkle@legmt.gov,  Jedediah.Hinkle@legmt.gov,  Llew.Jones@legmt.gov,  steve@kellyforhd9.com,  shaneklakkenforhd37@proton.me,  Greg.Kmetz@legmt.gov,  Brandon.Ler@legmt.gov,  kathylove4montana@gmail.com,  

 

shannonforhouse70@gmail.com,  Bill.Mercer@legmt.gov, tom@millett4montana.com,  Russel.Miner@legmt.gov,  Braxton.Mitchell@legmt.gov,  dvmoore@nemont.net,  Fiona.Nave@legmt.gov,  Terry.Nelson@legmt.gov,  nicastro4mt@gmail.com,  Nelly.Nicol@legmt.gov,  George.Nikolakakos@legmt.gov,  me.nikolakakos@yahoo.com, Greg.Oblander@legmt.gov,  greg@gregoverstreet.com,

 Gary.Parry@legmt.gov,  Amy.Regier@legmt.gov, Linda.Reksten@legmt.gov,  Jerry.Schillinger@legmt.gov,  schomerforoffice@gmail.com,  lukasschubertmt@gmail.com,  Kerri.Seekins-Crowe@legmt.gov , tracyasharp4mt12@gmail.com,  Courtenay.Sprunger@legmt.gov,  thielforrichlandmt@gmail.com,  Eric.Tilleman@legmt.gov,  mikev@vintonlog.com, Kenneth.Walsh@legmt.gov,  Zack.Wirth@legmt.gov , Katie.Zolnikov@legmt.gov,  

 

A Balanced Budget Amendment Just Won’t Work

Like We’d Like It To Work

Janine Hansen, Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman,

director@nevadafamilies.org, eagle@eagleforum.org

 

The only way to balance a budget is to raise taxes or cut spending? There is no requirement in Article V Balanced Budget applications like Montana’s that prohibits tax increases and in case of “emergency” the balance budget requirements would have to be set aside.

 

Montana receives 46.58% of its state revenue from the Federal Government. Montana would have to raise taxes if a Federal Balanced Budget Amendment was adopted to cover the 46% of state revenue that comes from the Federal Government. https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2022

 

State Legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, continue to vote for Federal Mandates and money. How can they honestly say they support limiting spending by the Federal Government when they continue to vote to take more money from the Feds?

 

The Balanced Budget sounds very good to conservatives. We wish there was an easy way to reign in the out-of-control spending of the Federal Government. However, the Constitution is not the problem. The Federal Government has ignored the Enumerated Powers listed in the Constitution and spends money on countless things that are not authorized by the Constitution, like education. If a Balanced Budget Amendment was in the Constitution it would make matters worse by actually constitutionally authorizing Federal Spending outside of the Enumerated Powers.

 

An Article V Convention should be of great concern, especially to small population conservative states like Montana. Article V does not tell us how many delegates there will be or how they will be selected. But, “Between 1973 and 1992, 22 bills were introduced in the U.S. House and 19 in the U.S. Senate that sought to establish a procedural framework that would apply to an Article V Convention…The Senate… passed the ‘Federal Constitutional Convention Procedures Act,’ on two separate occasions; as S 215 in 1971 and as S 1272 in 1983.” Although these bills did not pass Congress, they asserted Congress’s intent on setting the formula for delegates and all other procedures for an Article V Convention. Source Congressional Research Service, April 11, 2014. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20140411_R42589_f565d06c544815456eb3805d4f52c2b5749d36b7.pdf

 

These bills called for proportional representation of States based on the formula for the Electoral College, which adds the state’s number of Congressmen and 2 Senators, not one vote per state. So, Montana would have 4 votes and California 54 at a Convention.  As a conservative that’s very scary.

 

California, which will be a participant in an Article V Constitutional Convention, passed in September 2023 an application for an Article V Convention which completely guts the Second Amendment. Eagle Forum has long contended that an Article V Constitutional Convention for proposing amendments would result in losing our Second Amendment Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. In addition, we know the Electoral College would be in jeopardy because 17 states and the District of Columbia have already passed the National Popular Vote Compact. Thankfully there is push back nationally to the “woke” agenda, but we still at are risk of losing our Freedom of Speech and the Free Exercise of Religion in a Constitutional Convention. https://eagleforum.org/topics/2nd-amendment/article-v-constitutional-convention-threatens-our-second-amendment.html

 

In 2012 the National Republican Committee adopted a Resolution opposing all Article V Constitutional Convention applications and for good reason. Their Resolution still stands.

 

With all of these concerns about a BBA, the greatest concern is that an Article V Constitutional Convention cannot be limited.

 

Phyllis Schlafly the founder of Eagle Forum often quoted Chief Justice Warren Burger as the highest authority in the United States to ever speak out on a Constitutional Convention. He stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…”

http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon/pdf/WarrenBurger-letter.pdf

 

In addition, in 2015 the New Jersey Law Journal reported that Supreme Court Justice “Scalia called it ‘a horrible idea’ to hold a constitutional convention in this age of special interests.”

 

What can we do with an out of control Federal Government? Elections are a big answer, just as we witnessed in the 2024 election. And State Legislators can refuse federal mandates and federal money. One encouraging sign is that States have realized they can push back against Federal Bullying. Texas is a prime example. They have passed laws to deal in their state with the massive illegal immigration invasion and 25 state Governors are supporting them.

 

The Balanced Budget Amendment won’t work and will result in higher taxes. Let’s not take a chance on losing our precious fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Montana Thank these 8 Senators for Opposing Constitutional Convention

Montana:

Please Encourage these 8 Republican Senators who

oppose SJR4

 

We are still waiting for VOTE in the Whole Senate

SJ4 Constitutional Convention on a Balanced Budget

 

Supreme Court Justice Scalia called it a “horrible idea” to hold a constitutional convention in the age of special interests. “Once you get those people together, you never know what they’re going to do,”

 

MESSAGE: Thank you for opposing SJ4, the Article V Constitutional Convention for a Balanced Budget. The only way to balance the budget is to raise taxes or cut spending. There is no requirement in Montana’s Article V Balanced Budget applications that prohibits tax increases and in case of an “emergency,” the balance budget requirements would have to be set aside. Because Montana receives 46% of its state revenue from the Federal Government taxes would have to be raised on Montanans. An Article V Convention cannot be limited to a single subject. It will open the Constitution to unlimited changes. Thank you again for opposing SJ4. (Or better yet write your own message) Much more information is below.

 

These Republican Senators are identified as opposing SJ4. Please Thank Them.

Becky.Beard@legmt.gov, wyliegaltformt@gmail.com, gregg.hunter77@gmail.com, Forrest.Mandeville@legmt.gov, Theresa.Manzella@legmt.gov, bobphalen@midrivers.com, Russ.Tempel@legmt.gov, Shelley.Vance@legmt.gov,

 

A Balanced Budget Amendment Just Won’t Work

Like We’d Like It To Work

Janine Hansen, Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman,

director@nevadafamilies.org, eagle@eagleforum.org

 

The only way to balance a budget is to raise taxes or cut spending? There is no requirement in Article V Balanced Budget applications like Montana’s that prohibits tax increases and in case of an “emergency,” the balance budget requirements would have to be set aside.

 

Montana receives 46.58% of its state revenue from the Federal Government. Montana would have to raise taxes if a Federal Balanced Budget Amendment was adopted to cover the 46% of state revenue that comes from the Federal Government. https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2022

 

State Legislators, both Republicans and Democrats, continue to vote for Federal Mandates and money. How can they honestly say they support limiting spending by the Federal Government when they continue to vote to take more money from the Feds?

 

The Balanced Budget sounds very good to conservatives. We wish there was an easy way to reign in the out-of-control spending of the Federal Government. However, the Constitution is not the problem. The Federal Government has ignored the Enumerated Powers listed in the Constitution and spends money on countless things that are not authorized by the Constitution, like education. If a Balanced Budget Amendment was in the Constitution it would make matters worse by actually constitutionally authorizing Federal Spending outside of the Enumerated Powers.

 

An Article V Convention should be of great concern, especially to small population conservative states like Montana. Article V does not tell us how many delegates there will be or how they will be selected. But, “Between 1973 and 1992, 22 bills were introduced in the U.S. House and 19 in the U.S. Senate that sought to establish a procedural framework that would apply to an Article V Convention…The Senate… passed the ‘Federal Constitutional Convention Procedures Act,’ on two separate occasions; as S 215 in 1971 and as S 1272 in 1983.” Although these bills did not pass Congress, they asserted Congress’s intent on setting the formula for delegates and all other procedures for an Article V Convention. Source Congressional Research Service, April 11, 2014. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20140411_R42589_f565d06c544815456eb3805d4f52c2b5749d36b7.pdf

 

These bills called for proportional representation of States based on the formula for the Electoral College, which adds the state’s number of Congressmen and 2 Senators, not one vote per state. So, Montana would have 4 votes and California 54 at a Convention.  As a conservative that’s very scary.

 

California, which will be a participant in an Article V Constitutional Convention, passed in September 2023 an application for an Article V Convention which completely guts the Second Amendment. Eagle Forum has long contended that an Article V Constitutional Convention for proposing amendments would result in the loss of our Second Amendment Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. In addition, we know the Electoral College would be in jeopardy because already 17 states and the District of Columbia have passed the National Popular Vote Compact. Thankfully there is push back nationally to the “woke” agenda, but we still at are risk of losing our Freedom of Speech and the Free Exercise of Religion in a Constitutional Convention. https://eagleforum.org/topics/2nd-amendment/article-v-constitutional-convention-threatens-our-second-amendment.html

 

In 2012 the National Republican Committee adopted a Resolution opposing all Article V Constitutional Convention applications and for good reason. Their Resolution still stands.

 

With all of these concerns about a BBA, the greatest concern is that an Article V Constitutional Convention cannot be limited.

 

Phyllis Schlafly the founder of Eagle Forum often quoted Chief Justice Warren Burger as the highest authority in the United States to ever speak out on a Constitutional Convention. He stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…”

http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon/pdf/WarrenBurger-letter.pdf

 

In addition, in 2015 the New Jersey Law Journal reported that Supreme Court Justice “Scalia called it ‘a horrible idea’ to hold a constitutional convention in this age of special interests.”

 

What can we do with an out-of-control Federal Government? Elections are a big answer, just as we witnessed in the 2024 election. State Legislators can refuse federal mandates and federal money. One encouraging sign is that States have realized they can push back against Federal Bullying. Texas is a prime example. They have passed laws to deal in their state with the massive illegal immigration invasion and 25 state Governors are supporting them.

 

The Balanced Budget Amendment won’t work and will result in higher taxes. Let’s not take a chance on losing our precious fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

MONTANA Hearing Feb 17 Noon Constitutional Convention Commissioners bill

Alert Montana!

Article V Commissioners bill for a Constitutional Convention

 

SB120: HEARING February 17, 12:00 noon,  Room 472 House Legislative Administration Committee on SB120 Article V Constitutional Convention Commissioners bill.

 

You can participate by attending the hearing and testifying.

Or Sign up to testify on Zoom at least 2 hours before the hearing at this link: https://participate.legmt.gov/

You can submit written testimony at the same link.

 

CONTACT the House members below.

 

 

MESSAGE: Please vote NO on SB120 the Commissioner's bill which will not work. The remedy in SB120 for controlling the Montana Commissioners and Delegation at a Constitutional Convention is to RECALL the Commissioners and Delegation. However, if Montana’s delegation is recalled because they have “exceeded their authority”… the Article V Constitutional Convention will continue, but WITHOUT any representation from Montana. AND the Convention’s actions to amend the U.S. Constitution will continue without Montana. The only purpose of a commissioner's bill is to take away our concerns but it won’t work. (Or better yet write your own message) Much more information is below.

 

Please CONTACT these Republican members of the House Legislative Administration Committee:

 

Chair: George.Nikolakakos@legmt.gov, Kenneth.Walsh@legmt.gov, Lee.Deming@legmt.gov, Terry.Falk@legmt.gov, Greg.Kmetz@legmt.gov, Gary.Parry@legmt.gov, Amy.Regier@legmt.gov, Lukas.Schubert@legmt.gov

 

Copy of SB120: https://bills.legmt.gov/#/laws/bill/2/LC1789?open_tab=bill

 

Oppose Commissioner Limitation Bill for an

Article V Constitutional Convention

By Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman Janine Hansen, director@nevadafamilies.org 775-397-6859

 

If you oppose an Article V Constitutional Convention, then you must oppose any commissioner limitation bill. The purpose of SB120, the Montana commissioner limitation bill, is to alleviate your fears about what may actually happen at an Article V Constitutional Convention. But the limitation bill will not work.

 

The remedy in SB120 for controlling the Montana Commissioners and Delegation at a Convention is to RECALL the Commissioners and Delegation. However, if Montana’s delegation is recalled because they have “exceeded their authority”… the Article V Constitutional Convention will continue, but WITHOUT any representation from Montana. AND the Convention’s actions to amend the Constitution will continue without Montana.

 

SB120 makes the flawed assumption that a Convention will allow only one vote per state. That is preposterous!

 

“Between 1973 and 1992, 22 bills were introduced in the U.S. House and 19 in the U.S. Senate that sought to establish a procedural framework that would apply to an Article V Convention…The Senate…passed constitutional Convention procedures bills, the ‘Federal Constitutional Convention Procedures Act,’ on two separate occasions; as S 215 in 1971 and as S 1272 in 1983.” Source Congressional Research Service, April 11, 2014.

 

These bills called for proportional representation of States based on the formula for the Electoral College. None suggested one vote per state as SB120 does. With this historic precedence, it is folly to assume that Congress would not determine in legislation the formula for state representation, as a prerequisite for calling a convention. Again it is folly to assume that any formula could pass Congress without obtaining the necessary votes from large population States that would insist on proportional representation. 

 

Why would California with 54 Electoral votes, Texas with 38, New York and Florida with 29 each, voluntarily vote themselves such a huge disadvantage to be equal in a Convention to states like Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, North and South Dakota with 3 or 4 Electoral votes each? It is not reasonable to assume that politically it could possibly happen.

 

Article V does not give states the power to limit the actions of commissioners. Article V gives Congress the power to Call the Convention which includes, by implication, making the rules. In Article 1 Section 7 clause 18, the Constitution gives Congress the power, “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department of Office thereof.”

 

Right now the proponents of the Article V Constitutional Convention, because they have failed to reach the 34 states constitutionally required threshold, are finding new ways to COUNT. They are adding together diverse subjects of Article V State Applications from as long ago as one from New York in 1789. They add others from the Civil War era, some opposing polygamy, and still others calling for the direct election of Senators which is already part of the Constitution….to make their argument that they have reached the required 34 states. They also added that many of the 12 states, like Montana, rescinded all of their previous applications for an Article V Convention. All of that is astonishing! And as crooked as stealing an election, except they will steal our beloved Constitution instead!

 

Another concern is that proponents who claim to want a limited Article V Constitutional Convention have lists of amendments they propose themselves, for instance, Mark Levin in his book promotes eleven amendments, Governor Greg Abbott of Texas wants nine amendments and the Convention of States Pocket Guide promotes an unlimited plethora of amendments..

 

Phyllis Schlafly the founder of Eagle Forum often quoted Chief Justice Warren Burger as the highest authority in the United States to ever speak out on a Constitutional Convention. He stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…”

http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon/pdf/WarrenBurger-letter.pdf

 

Who do you trust with your Constitution today? Unelected appointed delegates to a Constitutional Convention who will never face the voters?

MONTANA Hearing Mon Feb 10 3pm Art. V Constitutional Convention Term Limits

February 9, 2025

Janine Hansen, Eagle Forum National Constitutional Issues Chairman 775-397-6859, director@nevadafamilies.org

Please share with friends and family. We need your help!!!

One More Article V Constitutional Convention this time on Term Limits   Montana House Energy, Technology, and Federal Relations Committee; HEARING: on HJ 13, Monday, February 10, 3:00pm MT, Room 472. Remote Testimony sign up in advance: https://www.legmt.gov/participate/   US Term Limits is testifying around the country saying that they don’t really want an Article V Convention, but that they want to scare Congress into passing a Term Limits Amendment. That’s not what HJ 13 says. It makes an application for an Article V Constitutional Convention. We should not pay chicken with the Constitution.   Please CONTACT the Republican House Committee members listed below.   MESSAGE: Please vote NO on HJ 13 an Article V Constitutional Convention on Congressional Term Limits. We have term limits every election. Limiting an Article V Convention to just Term Limits is impossible. Conservative Supreme Court Justice Scalia called an Article V convention a “horrible idea”. After the convention is convened the Convention will set its own rules and agenda. Liberal states like California and New York will all be there with radical agendas to eliminate the Electoral College and repeal the Second Amendment. Please don’t play chicken with our Constitution for term limits which we have every election. (Or better yet write your own message.) More information is below.   CONTACT: Republican Committee members: Chair: Gary.Parry@legmt.gov, Greg.Kmetz@legmt.gov, Larry.Brewster@legmt.gov, Paul.Fielder@legmt.gov, Tom.Millett@legmt.gov, Braxton.Mitchell@legmt.gov, Tracy.Sharp@legmt.gov, Katie.Zolnikov@legmt.gov,   Chief Justice Warren Burger is the highest authority in the United States to ever speak out on a Constitutional Convention. He stated: “I have also repeatedly given my opinion that there is no effective way to limit or muzzle the actions of a Constitutional Convention. The Convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the Convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the Convention would obey. After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda…” http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon/pdf/WarrenBurger-letter.pdf More information from Eagle Forum: https://eagleforum.org/topics/concon.html   Justice Scalia’s comments recorded by David Gialanella, New Jersey Law Journal, May 8, 2015

Further Information:

Article V Constitutional Convention Threatens our Second Amendment More information: Con Con/Article V