000			03978nam a2200457 i 4500
001			EBC4454767
003			MiAaPQ
005			20240123162055.0
006			m o d |
007			cr cnu||||||||
008			150707s2016 gau ob 001 0 eng|d
020			_z9780820349008 (hardcover : alk. paper)
020			_a9780820348995 (e-book)
035			_a(MiAaPQ)EBC4454767
035			_a(Au-PeEL)EBL4454767
035			_a(CaPaEBR)ebr11206767
035			_a(CaONFJC)MIL906940
035			_a(OCoLC)945566977
040			_aMiAaPQ _beng _erda _epn _cMiAaPQ _dMiAaPQ
043			_an-us---
050		4	_aKF4555 _b.V565 2016
082	0		_a342.7303/2 _223
100	1		_aVile, John R., _eauthor.
245	1	0	_aConventional wisdom : _bthe alternate Article V mechanism for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution / _cJohn R. Vile.
264		1	_aAthens, Georgia : _bThe Universit9y of Georgia Press, _c[2016]
300			_a1 online resource (285 pages)
336			_atext _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _2rdacarrier
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references (pages 243-259) and index.
505	0		_aThe Constitutional Convention of 1787 and its origins -- The establishment of the amending provisions in Article V and the ratification provisions in Article VII -- The history of Constitutional Amendments in the United States -- The lae Eighteenth century and Nineteenth century provide a rival set of Convention precedents -- A survey of early commentary on Article V -- The modern debate over limiting conventions -- Using criteria and ideal types to think about the big picture -- The selection and likely characteristics of delegates -- Organizationaol and logistical issues related to Article V Conventions -- Different kinds of Conventions.
520			_a"Article V of the Constitution allows two-thirds majorities of both houses of Congress to propose amendments to the document and a three-fourths majority of the states to ratify them. Scholars and frustrated advocates of constitutional change have often criticized this process for being too difficult. Despite this, state legislatures have yet to use the other primary method that Article V outlines for proposing amendments: it permits two-thirds of the state legislatures to petition Congress to call a convention to propose amendments that, like those proposed by Congress, must be ratified by three-fourths of the states. In this book, John R. Vile surveys more than two centuries of scholarship on Article V and concludes that the weight of the evidence (including a much-overlooked Federalist essay) indicates that states and Congress have the legal right to limit the scope of such conventions to a single subject and that political considerations would make a runaway convention unlikely. Charting a prudent course between those who fail to differentiate revolutionary change from constitutional change, those who fear ever using the Article V convention mechanism that the Framers clearly envisioned, and those who would vest total control of the convention in Congress, the states, or the convention itself, Vile's work will enhance modern debates on the subject." -- Back cover.
588			_aDescription based on print version record.
590			_aElectronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, MI : ProQuest, 2016. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest affiliated libraries.
610	1	0	_aUnited States. _tConstitution. _nArticle 5.
650		0	_aConstitutional amendments _zUnited States.
655		4	_aElectronic books.
776	0	8	_iPrint version: _aVile, John R. _tConventional wisdom : the alternate Article V mechanism for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution. _dAthens, Georgia : The Universit9y of Georgia Press, [2016] _hxv, 266 pages ; 24 cm _z9780820349008
797	2		_aProQuest (Firm)
856	4	0	_uhttps://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bacm-ebooks/detail.action?docID=4454767 _zClick to View
999			_c251956 _d251956