On February 23, 2023 the NH House soundly defeated the Convention of States (COS) application (HCR1) after a massive push by the convention lobby. Sadly, 156 Republicans voted for it lured by the prospect of “term limits” and a “balanced budget”.

But what is the real goal of a COS? A completely new “progressive” Constitution, one of more than three that have been written!

This Thursday March 16, the House will debate and vote on the term limits application (HCR4), which we are hoping meets the same fate as COS.

Please contact your legislators and point out that an Article V Convention is a bad idea—whether or not they support congressional term limits. A Convention called by Congress under Article V can propose ANY constitutional changes—including a new Constitution! (Facts in Opposition to an Article V Convention)

Also–the procedure by which the Term Limits application was retained in committee on February 3 and passed a week later with an amendment, was improper. So we’re asking legislators to Vote “No” on the Amendment as well as on HCR 4 itself.

In addition, two delegate bills are moving through the legislative process unimpeded. HB 269 is in the House Finance committee with costs being evaluated; and HB 392 has already passed the House and has been assigned to a Senate committee. Delegate bills are useless for their purported purpose, in that Delegates to an Article V Convention would have more power than state legislators—therefore, Delegates can’t be controlled by state law.

Please write one letter to the NH House against the term limits application (HCR 4) and the Delegate bill still in the House (HB 269); and another letter to the NH Senate against the Delegate bill that moved to the Senate (HB 392).

Let’s help New Hampshire stand up to the well-funded convention lobby once again! (Dark Money Fund COS Org)

The Legislation

Here are the bills we oppose in the New Hampshire House:

HCR 4 (Term Limits). On House Calendar. Scheduled for debate and vote before the full House: Thurs. March 16, 2023 @ 9:00 AM (EDT).

HB 269 (Delegate bill). Pending in the House Finance committee where the cost is being evaluated. The bill will be sent to the House floor with a recommendation.

Here is the bill we oppose in the New Hampshire Senate:

HB 392 – (Delegate bill)—Passed the House. Pending in the Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs Committee.

Your House Letter

Please write these 395 New Hampshire Representatives and ask them to Vote “No” on the Amendment to HCR 4, “No” on HCR 4, and “No” on HB 269. Congress isn’t authorized to call a limited convention under Article V.

Representatives’ Addresses (be sure to BCC)

Email for House Republicans and House Democrats

Your Senate Letter

Please write all 24 New Hampshire Senators and tell them why they should vote “No” on SB 392.
Email for ALL SENATORS: senators@leg.state.nh.us

State legislatures have no power to select select Delegates! In the past, Congress has indicated it would provide for the election of Delegates!

Also, send a copy of your letter to the committee assistant – tricia.melillo@leg.state.nh.us — addressed to Sen. Gray, Chairman; Sen. Murphy, Vice Chairman; and Members of the Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs Committee:


States have no Power to Select or Control Delegates to an Article V Convention” shows that those who promise that State Legislators will select and control the Delegates are making stuff up! Delegates have the self-evident Right “to alter or to abolish” our existing “Form of Gov’t,” as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, para. 2. So, no one has power over Delegates!

DANGER: Article V Convention Legislation filed in Congress…” shows that the assurances of a limited convention, which the lobbyists have been selling to State Legislators for a decade to get their votes, are false. The federal bills suggest that if Congress calls an Article V Convention, the call will NOT be for a limited convention.

The “Brilliant Men” flyer shows that James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, four US Supreme Court Justices, and other jurists and scholars warned that Delegates to an Article V convention can’t be controlled.

Myths v. Facts” exposes a number of the false assurances made by convention supporters.

Bluffing Their Way to an Art. V Convention, Part 2: The Best PR Money Can Buy,” showcases the PR war being waged by Mark Meckler, President of Convention of States (COS), which creates the false impression that Americans are demanding a “convention of states.” The supposed grassroots momentum (e.g. petitions, polls, name-dropping, etc.) that Meckler creates with dark money can push Congress into calling a constitutional convention which is inherently illimitable.

Dark Money—Not the Grassroots—Is Behind the Convention of States Organizations (COS)” proves that almost 2/3 of the money driving COS’s effort to apply to Congress for an Article V Convention, is coming from major donors giving COS $5,000 to $2,000,000 over the latest 3 years of reporting available. Why are multi-millionaires and billionaires trying to get their hands on our Constitution?

COS adopts Newspeak to sell the Con-Con” debunks the narrative that a convention called under Article V is a “convention of states,” rather than a “constitutional convention.” COS made up the myth that an A5C is controlled from start to finish by State Legislatures. COS is waging a semantics war.

An Article V Convention Made Easy” shows why Delegates to an Article V Convention have the power to throw off the Constitution we have and set up a new one, with a new and easier mode of ratification.

And Convention of States (COS) board member Robert P. George has co-drafted a new constitution which grants massive powers to the fed gov’t AND imposes gun control with red flag confiscations!

In “The Risk of the Right-Wing Push to Rewrite the Constitution,” celebrated historian James M. Banner, Jr. raises the alarm about the push, mainly by a few billionaires, to trigger a convention under Article V of the US Constitution:

“…the greatest danger is that there’s nothing in Article V that prevents an amendatory convention from following the example of the 1787 convention in Philadelphia, which became a runaway convention by simply assuming its freedom to propose a substitute for the very frame of government, the Articles of Confederation, under which it convened…[If] the proponents of an Article V convention succeed in setting one in motion,…“the extraordinary American experiment in the self-government of an open society that has endured for over 230 years will be in never-before-experienced peril.”

Chief Justice Warren Burger’s LETTER to Phyllis Schlafly dated June 22, 1988:

“…[T]here 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…After a Convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the Convention if we don’t like its agenda…”