A resolution applying for a convention of the states under Article V of the Constitution of the United States.
The passage of HCR1, if it were to garner the necessary support from two-thirds of state legislatures across the country, could initiate a significant constitutional amendment process. The proposed amendments would aim to reclaim local governance powers and ensure accountability at the federal level. By asserting state rights, it reflects a growing sentiment among certain legislative members who believe that the federal government has exceeded its intended authority, particularly in fiscal matters and state autonomy.
HCR1 is a resolution introduced in the New Hampshire legislature seeking a convention of the states as outlined in Article V of the United States Constitution. The resolution calls for amendments that address specific concerns such as imposing fiscal restraints on the federal government, limiting its power and jurisdiction, and placing term limits on federal officials and congressional members. This effort is based on the belief that state legislators serve as guardians of liberty against federal overreach.
The sentiment surrounding HCR1 appears to be supportive among those who prioritize state rights and wish to maintain a limited federal government. Proponents see this resolution as a crucial step towards restoring the founding principles of governance that emphasize a balance of power between states and the federal government. However, there may also be underlying concerns from opponents about the potential implications of a convention of states, including the risk of unintended consequences or radical changes to the Constitution.
Key points of contention surrounding HCR1 revolve around the risks and benefits of calling a convention of states. Critics may voice concerns that such a convention could be uncontrollable and lead to broader amendments that could further dilute protections or extend federal powers, contrary to the bill's intentions. Moreover, the historical context of prior conventions invites skepticism about the outcomes of amending the Constitution through this route, raising questions about how such actions may impact future governance.