Constitutional Convention & Conference of States |
Last month (May-95) we issued a press release with a formal invitation to the CSG's Michael Leavitt (Governor of Utah) to debate the COS pros and "cons" with COS opponent Charles Duke (Colorado State Senator). After much effort, we finally received a response from Gov. Leavitt. Below is a text transcript of his letter. Following that is our response with supporting information. PLEASE redistribute this widely. Since the mainstream media only casts generalized insults at us and will not print our documentation, we must make it our #1 priority to bring this issue and the facts supporting our position all to the forefront of the American Public's eye. Remember, Leavitt & Co. will be pushing hard when the state legislative sessions re-open. STATE LEGISLATORS MUST SEE THIS INFORMATION!!!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
June 29, 1995
STATE OF UTAH
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
SALT LAKE CITY 84114
Miss Jackie
Patru
National
Co-Director
Council on Domestic
Relations
P.O. Box 138
Carlinville, Illinois
62626
Dear Ms. Patru:
This letter is in response to correspondence sent earlier this month asking me to debate Senator Charles Duke of Colorado on the topic of the Conference of the States. My whole interest in this issue is restoring to states the authority and protections granted to them by the founders in the Constitution. These protections have been significantly eroded or lost over many years of centralization of authority at the national level. My desire is to use the most effective and most proper means possible to accomplish this purpose. I am not interested in confrontation, grandstanding or putting on a show for the media. I am interested in creating a process that gives states a fighting chance to restore that authority and those protections we have lost.
I have worked hard to develop coalitions of state elected leaders who support that goal. With adequate support, I believe we can actually accomplish something, reversing the trend toward centralization rather than just complaining and talking about it as we have done for so many years. The many and varied groups opposing the Conference of the States have stopped the process of state legislatures calling for the Conference.
While I believe that is unfortunate, because it has set back this important cause, I am nevertheless committed to press forward toward the goal of restoring authority and protections to states. Because of the opposition to the formal resolution, the Steering Committee is revisiting that issue. It is the end result that is important here, not how we get to it. Therefore, I am not interested in debating Seator Duke regarding the resolution process. If the resolution process is unworkable, then we are willing to look at alternatives. I do not want to debate processes because the process is much less important than the ultimate result of increased state authority.
Reasonable people can disagree on tactics, while supporting the general goal. I have developed admiration for the grassroots organizational abilities of the groups who have opposed the Conference. While I have been disappointed at some of the extreme rhetoric and wild accusations made by some of the Conference opponents, I understand that any movement attracts a wide variety of personalities, not all of whom can be controlled.
It is for these reasons that I respectfully decline your invitation to debate.
Sincerely,
Michael O. Leavitt Governor