The convening of a Constitutional Convention for even a single issue threatens our very existence as we've known it, no matter how well intentioned the reason. Please read this carefully and pass it on.

Once two thirds of the states (34) have applied for one, a new Constitutional Convention must be called. As many as 32 states have applied in the past. Since then, three states have rescinded their application.

Nonetheless, the recent drive for a Constitutional Convention is dogged and has been dressed up as a movement to require Congress to call a convention for the limited purpose of proposing an amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.

Quoting George Detweiler, the late Twin Falls resident and former assistant attorney general for the state of Idaho: "Applications for a convention are serious business only to be used if a Legislature believes that the present Constitution is structurally flawed and in need of repair. An unbalanced Federal Budget is not the result of a Constitutional flaw. It is the result of a Congress which refuses to obey Constitutional restraints upon its spending of Federal Funds."

And now, an even newer proposal is going around calling for a convention for a "28th Amendment" that would abolish the ability of the Senate and House to exempt themselves from any legislation such as Obamacare.

Violation of the public trust should be considered the most heinous of crimes. As men and women of integrity, legislators themselves should create the 28th Amendment. Legislators benefiting themselves through exemption to law should be overwhelmingly voted out of office by the beleaguered. A Constitutional Convention is not necessary!

Further quoting George Detweiler: "Article V of our Constitution clearly gives the power to propose Amendments exclusively to the convention. This is explicit in the wording of the Article which sets up a 3 Step Process.

"Step 1: The Legislatures of two thirds of the States apply to Congress to call a convention.

"Step 2: Congress calls the convention while deciding other details such as where the convention may meet, how the delegates are to be paid and how much, how many delegates there will be and how they are chosen. Note that nothing in the Constitution requires, nor guarantees that delegates to a Con Con will be elected by the people. Congress is given a free hand to determine the method of selecting these delegates. Congress itself could choose to make the appointment of delegates. Congress could provide that the State Legislatures appoint delegates. In short, Congress is given a blank check to determine how convention delegates are to be chosen. It could provide for their election, but it is not required to do so.

"Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, the late Arthur Goldberg, warned the nation that this absence of any guarantee of electing delegates could put the convention in control of special interest groups. Writing for the Miami Herald newspaper he wrote, '...the absence of any mechanism to ensure representative selection of delegates could put a runaway convention in the hands of single-issue groups whose self-interest may be contrary to our national well-being.'

"Congress also has the power to determine how many delegates each state will have. But note again, the Constitution does not guarantee that every state is entitled to at least one delegate.

"Step 3: The call is for a convention for proposing Amendments to the Constitution. This language clearly states that only the convention is authorized to determine how many Amendments will be proposed and what subjects will be addressed in those Amendments.

"United States Supreme Court Justices and the nation's leading legal scholars have written privately that these single subject limitations cannot be enforced, that if a convention is called it will be free to propose any kind and number of Amendments to the same effect as if the limitations in the applications did not exist. In other words, although the applications are effective, all such limitations must be ignored."

The late Gerald Gunther, professor of law at Stanford University, wrote: "The fear that a Constitutional Convention could become a 'runaway' convention and propose wholesale changes in our Constitution is by no means unfounded. Rather, this broad view of the authority of a convention reflects the consensus of most constitutional scholars who have commented on the issue.'"

If the American public truly knew of the jeopardy which a convention poses to the Constitution there is no doubt that the people of America would demand: NO CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!

The integrity and very existence of the Constitution as we know it could be in jeopardy if a convention is called.

This is not hype, nor mere rhetoric. Read Article V of the Constitution. Know the facts.

Too many brave men and women have sacrificed too much in defense of our country and our Constitution to have it put into jeopardy by the calling of a Constitutional Convention whether intentional or inadvertent.

Rich Loudenback is a resident of Hayden.