revolution" will be televised. . mark: hello america, i'm mark levin. this is "life, liberty & levin." i have two great guests. mr. mark meckler. how are you? >> good to see you. mark: tom coburn, good to see you? >> good to see you, great to be with you. mark: two patriots, different backgrounds, you're california, you're oklahoma. you're a doctor, you served in the house of representatives, you served in the united states senate. before that you were a businessman and decided to become a physician. you've been a lawyer for some time, a businessman also and a

political activist. you helped start the tea party patriots and now you've decided we got to do something about the growth of government and the nation seems so unmoored from our constitutional system. dr. coburn, you're elected to the senate and then you said that's enough. tell us about that. >> well, mark, i spent ten years in the united states senate, following the enumerated powers. what our constitution laid out for us. and i actually sent letters every year to every senator saying i'm going to block what you do every year if you don't do that. in ten years, i was able to do positive things but not near what was necessary. i came to the conclusion what's wrong with the country isn't going to get fixed by the politicians and the senate of the house because we abandoned the core principles of the enumerated powers and ever expansive government that is limiting freedom and sacrificing the future of our

kids because we've mortgaged their future. and so i left looking for another method with which we can cheat history and not be a republic that falls because we didn't continue with the principles, the foundational principles that we had. mark: what are the issues that you think will cause this republic to fall? >> oh, several. one, the lack of virtue that's been promoted in the public education system. number two, the debt. number three, the unfunded liabilities. and number four, abandonment of the rule of law. if you read the history on other republics, we're doing exactly what they did that caused their own collapse, and we're repeating it. and you just had noticed this week that the treasury is going to borrow another three-quarter trillion dollars more this year than last year. at some point in time somebody is not going to loan us the money and the game's up, and the consequences are terrible

for our kids. >> republicans control congress. >> yes. mark: used to campaign fiscal conservatives, at least, don't focus on the social issues. let's focus on the financial and fiscal issues. what's happened? >> well, i think that's a natural consequences of career politicians. i mean, if you look at the people who vote against all this stuff, they're not the career politicians. they're the individual citizen legislator who says that isn't what we're supposed to be here for. one of the things i found interesting is the oath when you go into the senate doesn't mention your state. mentions the u.s. constitution, mentions our country, do what's in the best interest of the country, and i found that was in conflict with re-election with many members of the senate, and that's the other reason i leftcy didn't see a body capable of fixing the problems of our country, because the government has become so ever big that it

micromanages -- on average, the average state government gets to decide 40% of the, of their own money, unelected bureaucrat in washington decides it the rest of the time. that isn't what we're in for, that isn't what i believe our framers thought. what our frameers thought is we had experiments going on in different states and a limited role for the federal government, and actually in the clear documents said everything else is left to the people and to the states. well, we've abandoned that completely from washington. we believe washington, the country believes washington, the politicians believe washington. the judges believe washington should control it out. that isn't where i came, from that isn't what i was taught. i don't believe that's what the founders believed. we have a solution that will actually solve this great problem. mark: mark meckler, an activist. one of the great leaders of the great tea party movement, 2010.

democrats are swept out of house of representatives. soon thereafter, democrats are swept out of the senate. you figure, okay, now is the time to really get control over spending the size of government and so forth, and you see that's not happening. and you decide to move into another area. tell us about convention of states. what is article 5 of the constitution all about and why is it so important that our viewers know about this? >> well, you know, from all that activism, from the big switch in 2010 especially and realizing that nothing changed, i realized we were attacking the wrong problem. attacking a personnel issue. wrong people in congress. if you could just put the right people, in the right stuff would happen. time has shown us, that's not the case. things haven't changed we had this $1.3 trillion supplemental budget, whatever you want to call it, it's not fiscally responsible. there had to be another problem. if you dig, in we created a structural problem. not a personnel issue, we've broken the structure of our

government. so if you put good people like tom coburn in congress, jim demint and now jim jordan, mark meadows, there are good people in congress, they're working in a broken system. they cannot fix what ails the country. the founders gave us a remty, in article 5 of the constitution, they inserted the second clause, the power to call the states for the very purpose of proposing amendments to restrain government tyranny. when i say that, people say how do you know what the purpose was? we can look at madison's notes two, days before the end of convention, september 15, 1787, colonel george mason from virginia stands, addresses the assembly and says something like this. we have a problem with the document we created. we've given power to congress but not to people, and asked a question, are we so naive that a government that becomes a tyranny will propose the rice amendments to restrain their

own tyranny. they debated everything, right? not that. his notes say nin com, and unanimously they vote to put the second clause of article 5 that gives us the power. what they intended is the power to restrain a federal government run amok. that is the purpose of our efforts around article 5. call a convention, get the states together have, them propose amendments that will retrain federal tyranny. mark: isn't it true, dr. coburn, that this is what the states used to do? they used to meet, they used to have conventions, not constitutional conventions, conventions of the states, to resolve problems, to address issues, this is to practice, so to insert it in the constitution as mark meckler says is to counter the notion that only amendments can come from the federal congress, two-thirds of both houses and wasn't it mason who said what if congress is oppressive?

then what will the people do? other than violence, there needs to be a way to address this. so why do you think so many republicans in state houses and state senates claim to be standing up for the constitution by opposing the constitution? that is, by opposing convention of states in article 5, which is the second way provided by the framers and the ratifyers to amend the constitution. >> there is two reasons to that. you know, you either have fear or courage, and what we see today is a lot of fear in our country. and leadership requires courage to do the right thing, and so you also have a lot of interest groups that are making money off of opposing this, and actually siding with the far left progressive that we shouldn't fix our country and limit. i think there's four main things that are allowing our republic to survive. touched on it a little bit.

rule of law is important, that's understressed. virtue, understressed. no question about it. number three is a limited government. we have anything but a limited government, and number four is economic freedom. this country led the world for 200 years in economic freedom. we're 17th in the world now. why is that? that's the tyranny of a large government that interferes with the ability to start building expanding business. one of the things you are seeing presently through the elimination of lots of regulation is good economic growth. it's not all based on taxes. it's based on the monkeys getting off business so it can create wealth and create jobs. so i think the number one reason is fear and lack of knowledge and so hopefully through you and other people and what we're doing around the country is that we can educate people. here's what our founders thought. this isn't a johnny come lately idea. it's been there, they put it in

intentionally so we could have a solution to where we are today, and they knew this would happen because history tells us this is what happens to republics. mark: mark meckler, isn't it true, there's two ways to amend the constitution under article 5, through congress. state ratification, through the states, state ratification, that's the only difference. but isn't it true today the supreme court amends the constitution, the massive bureaucracy. in other words, the process isn't being followed and so when you raise one of the processes that actually exists in the constitution, that's actually a legitimate way to address efforts to act outside the constitutional boundarys. >> you nailed it. and the founders warned us about this, about amending the constitution bit by bit, through the courts, through legislative action. this is why the left opposes this so much because they've

been doing this over a century. they amend through the courts. and most people don't realize, this thing of the constitution as the thing they carry in the pocket. the one in the national archives, beautiful document. today if you order the constitution from the government printing office, publishing office, you can order it, $130, it is now 2738 pages with the supplements, over 3,000 pages,ways over 10 pound, contains every supreme court case that has ever told us what the beautiful succinct document means. it's outrageous. we're living out of the big, fat document. not the constitution most people think we're living under. that is the left's constitution, they love the big fat book because it gives government almost unlimited power. mark: so what do you say to those who say i love the constitution, we'll never do better than the men who gathered in philadelphia. my answer is i agree, but we can do better than the men and

women who serve on the supreme court or who serve in congress because it is they who have changed the united states constitution, and it is we who need to bring it back. does that make sense? >> it does. this is a movement to restore the constitution, and what i usually say to people who ask that question, as i say which constitution were you referring to? we have two in america. we have the one that you and i and all your readers and listeners and viewers love and that's the pocket constitution, the one in the national archives and the one changed over the last mostly 115 years by the federal courts and the supreme court by actions of the federal government. i love the original, and my goal is to strip away a bunch of the decisions that change the constitution, that gave the federal government so much power, that made the citizens smaller and restore the citizen and the states to their proper place in the balance. mark: is it realistic to believe that the entities, the institutions and the individuals who have created this post-constitutional design

will give us back our constitutional design? >> well, you know, i don't care what they believe. what i believe is, is the american spirit is about liberty and freedom, and if you go talk to individuals, i was in 32 states last year. if you talk to individuals, they want their freedom. they want to be able to decide, and you know, as mark says often, this movement is about making recommendations to the state. there's nothing foundational in this other than making a recommendation, but it's really about two gets to decide our own government, and what's happened is no longer do people get to decide. unelected judges, unelected bureaucrats decided for us. it's about restoring the process. so i think we can, but i think what we have to do is be very clear what our intent is. our intent is about restoring liberty. about restoring decision-making at the states. about honoring the vision of our founders that we will

decide as people. we give the power to the government. we give it to them. they don't give it to us. we give it to them, and we have the right to maintain and focus on our own freedom and our own movements within our individual states. and that's limited, of course, within the bill of rights, now, but the bill of rights is ignored, as are the enumerated powers. so i think it's ever positive that people can see that if we actually restore the commerce clause to what it was intended, then states will have a return of their rights to make decisions for their own individuals and the individuals in that states can actually control what happens in their state. mark: when we come back, i want to ask you, is there anything to fear from this process? and what is this process exactly? ladies and gentlemen, don't forget, almost every week night you can watch levin tv, levin tv, by joining us, go to

crtv.com/mark. crtv.com/mark or give us a call at 844-levin tv.

so, i have this recurring dream. i'm 85 years old in a job where i have to wear a giant hot dog suit. what? where's that coming from? i don't know. i started my 401k early, i diversified... i'm not a big spender. sounds like you're doing a lot. but i still feel like i'm not gonna have enough for retirement. like there's something else i should be doing. with the right conversation, you might find you're doing okay. so, no hot dog suit? not unless you want to. no. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade®.

new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses your movement and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and now, all beds are on sale. save 50% on the new sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. only for a limited time.

this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. . mark: mark meckler, dr. coburn. so what is this process?

is it set forth in the constitution? what is the process? >> it is. it's found in the second clause of article 5, the first and second clause, which lay out how we can amend our constitution, the great founding document of our nation. basically what it lays out, two ways, congress can propose amendments, two-thirds of each house, and if they do so, those can go out to states for ratification by the states which is 38 states today. the states get together and call for convention of proposing amendments. mark: so there's a meeting of the states. >> yes. mark: representatives of the states. >> yes. mark: as opposed to meetings between both houses of congress? >> yes. it's a parallel, the states have full discretion how to choose their own commissioners in the convention in true federalist fashion, i like that as a federalist and send as many people they want to convention. experts. legislators. when they get there each state has a single vote it is a convention of states not a convention of commissioners or

delegates. they will get there, elect their officers, they will debate the subject matter set forth in their resolutions that sent them to convention, and then if 26 states, a majority of states agree on any given amendments, they will be sent out for ratification. >> the amendment ratification process, just to keep it exactly the same as if congress proposed it. >> identical. mark: and you need 38 state legislatures or conventions of states to ratify? >> correct. mark: there can't be a runaway convention of states because they don't have the final say, correct? >> correct. when people talk about a runaway convention and express fear. i don't understand, you are afraid of people getting in a room and having a conversation and making recommendations? because that's all a convention can do. that's what i described as a suggesting convention. mark: how many state resolutions must there be? they are almost identical. they cover the same subject

matter. how many states agree to do that before a convention of states? >> the constitution says two-thirds of states, 34 states required to pass what are agregable resolutions, substantially the same. they cover the same subject matter, and so far 12 states have passed the resolutions that we're working on. mark: and the 12 states have passed these resolutions, by my math, and i'm not good at it, you need 20 -- >> 22 more. mark: 22 more? >> correct. mark: i suspect if you get 10 more you get the attention of washington, d.c. this process, dr. coburn, has been attacked, attacked mostly by the left. hundreds of organization said that are funding against it. funded by multiple billionaires and fringe elements on the right. the john birch society as well as others on the right, who apparently think the constitution and the text of the constitution should be

embraced, except for article 5. which is the fire alarm for the republic, am i right about that? >> yes, sir, yes, sir. you know. and fear guides it. the first thing to think about is the congress can pass any amendment they want and send it to the states. any crazy amendment. why don't they? because they know the american people wouldn't take it. so that's the first thing. the second thing is to remember that it requires 38 states to agree that anything that would come out of this. the converse of that is, all that requires is 13 judiciary chairman to say we're not taking this up. so 13 states control whether something is approved or not. so if they're worried about something being erroneous or out of whack with what the intent of our founders is, all you have to have is 13 people say we're not going to talk about it. so the safety to this is tremendously engaged in terms

of what our founders believed was important. a very high bar to get to a convention. you have to build consensus and then once you have a convention, you have to have a super majority that says yeah, we think we need to do. this so people running around like chickens with their head cut off have one or two motives. one, trying to raise money because they don't agree with this. if they understand the process they wouldn't be against it. or number two, socialist marxist which is the hard left saying don't do this because you're going to undermine all the socialism we put into our country. it's not about undermining socialism, not taking care of people, it's about restoring freedom, liberty, growth. think about what happened in terms of our country's growth after world war ii. there was limited government and magnificent growth. 6, 7, 8% per year. what would that do if we saw that again in our country? so restoring that.

the position of most people who don't want to see this on the far right is it's a position that doesn't have foundation in the intellectual arguments. they know it. john birch, larry mcdonald entered into the congressional record, he was head of the john birch society, the liberty amendments. their founder embraced the liberty amendments. this is a modern day opposition and suspect it's about raising money, not that we're against what we're trying to do. mark: isn't the problem that the constitution in so many respects has been eviscerated and it's interesting to hear the left, the progressive left whose intellectual forefathers, john dewey, woodrow wilson, ray, all these guys, attacked the constitution, they despised the balance of power. they despised separation of powers. they despised federalism.

the same people today who achieved the centralization of government who you have five justices who determine whether it is or not a fundamental right. bedamn the public. thousands of bureaucracies that passes thousands of laws where congress will pass hundreds and the conversations coming down from on high and let us get our liberty back, let us get our constitution back, let us participate in our government, and then we have people saying no, don't touch the constitution. is that about right? >> it's accurate and it's interesting because that movement to prevent people from using article 5 starts in about the 1970s after roe versus wade roughly. it comes from chief justice warren berger asked by a seminal figure on the left, phil schlafly and asked what you think about overturning the convention, asking about overturning roe versus wade. he doesn't like the idea and

says we might lose our beloved constitution. they then begin a campaign that lasted 50 years roughly, saying it would be dangerous to hold a convention. they realize for folks on the right, this is the only way to right the ship, to fix the structural deficit that's created. >> and folks on the right, we're constitutionalists, we're not even really on the right. we're right here. you got these guys over here, these guys over here. we're constitutionalists and yet they stick us in these different corners and so forth. we'll be right back. ♪ flintstones! meet the flintstones. ♪ ♪ they're the modern stone age family. ♪ ♪ from the town of bedrock. ♪ meet george jetson. ♪ ♪ his boy elroy. with instant acceleration, electric cars are more fun to drive and more affordable than ever. electric cars are here. plug into the present.

robert: live from "america's news headquarters." i'm robert gray. hundreds of south koreans heading north to reunite with long-separated family members. many have been separated since the korean war. south korea's unification ministry says there are 600,000 to 700,000 south core rians with relatives in north korea. larry nassar was transferred to a prison facility in oklahoma. he was previously imprisoned in tucson, arizona. he was assaulted when placed in the general population at the

facility. he has pled guilty to assaulting girls in his role as doctor for u.s.a. girls gymnastics. dr. coburn, mark meckler. dr. coburn, what reforms are you proposing that we institute? >> three areas, scope and jurisdiction federal government. and i'll get specific on that. financial responsibility. how about being accountable with our money? mark: you've spent an entire career on this. >> i have. and finally limiting the terms of both appointed and elected officials. but let me go to the core one. the fact that your state can't control how it educates its children comes about through a court decision that expanded the definition of the commerce clause that to something totally different than what our founders believe. that applies to the state

department of transportation, your epa and environmental organization in your state. you just think all the different organizations in the state, they are controlled by a federal government. all of a sudden the authority of the federal government to reach in and tell your state agencies and state legislators what they'll do because we know better in washington versus when they really don't know better, then we have fixed and restored the constitution to what it intends. it does a couple of things, number one gives states the flexibility to do the right thing for them and citizen at the right time versus a one size fits all everywhere. it eliminates a ton of bureaucracy. you can do that with the commerce clause, the general welfare clause and the necessary proper clause. all three of those have been prostituted by the courts to mean something totally different than what our founders meant. that will restore a ton of freedom. forcing the government to live

within its means, why isn't anybody working on the $1.2 trillion deficit we're having this year. mark: they are. >> working to raise it. why aren't they worried about the $144 trillion of unfunded liabilities that the millennials are going to have, that we created by creating programs but never raising the tax base to pay for those. so having general accepting accounting principles, so they can't cheat. omb cheats all the time. congressional budget office cheats all the time. third is shouldn't we limit the people in power or elected to be engaged a short time and come home and live under the laws that they make? and shouldn't we give an unlimited term because they were one time approved by congress as a judge? you know, look at all the judges in semi retirement that don't hardly carry any cases,

and we're still paying them because they have a lifetime appointment. mark: you and i have written books about the history of this process and proposed reform amendments and so forth. your book is smashing the d.c. monopoly. my book is the liberty amendment. >> right. mark: i started out opposing this idea. you may remember, we had a discussion about this. you probably didn't originally like the idea either. >> i didn't consider it. i thought here's the way we should do it. mark: right and i started studying it, this is exactly what the founders of this country want, no? you didn't come to this easily either until you actually informed yourself about this. is there any other way to restore our constitutional system? i don't know of any, do you? >> not that i'm aware of, mark, and i travel all over the country. 44 states in the last two

years, spoken to thousands of thousands of people. a small percentage of people object to this. when they do, i always ask this question. what's the alternative? you agree our system is broken, you agree the country is going to crash. what's your solution? i've never heard an alternative solution proposed. literally never. >> we can cheat history, that's the key thing, our founders gave us a cool to cheat history. mark: meaning we don't have to decline. >> we don't have to decline. we have a tool in the constitution if we use it prudently and we'll, we can restore our country to the vibrancy it once had. >> i hear people talk about states rights, the 10th amendment, federalism, but article 5 that gives it teeth. so how can you support the 10th amendment, state authority. talk about you're a federalist, you believe in federalism and reject the only method that exists in the federal constitution, for ensuring both

of those things? and yet i find in many respects this is the case. however, i also find that there are more and more people coming around. you have multimillions of people who support your organizations, 3 1/2 million in grassroots operation. you've got even more and more washington politicians and others who have supported this. we have mike huckabee. we have marco rubio. there are others too, right? i can't remember them all. >> and they kind of span the spectrum across what i would call people who love the constitution from maybe marco rubio, jeb bush is an endorser and guys like senator ron johnson in wisconsin, senator ben sass, senator rand paul. these are guys inside the machine. they come at politics from very different perspectives. someone called them middle of the road guys, conservative guys, the bottom line is there's no way to fix the country right now. mark: and if we don't take this

route, this is what i like to ask, what are the options? we continue to do what we're doing? we continue to drive up the debt? other reform amendments, some that i proposed, which is term limiting supreme court justices, members of the senate, members of the house. allowing a supermajority house in the senate, three-fifths to overturn a supreme court decision as long as they act within two years. it's in my view, no reason one justice should determine for the entire republic for all time that that's the position. or three-fifths of the state legislatures also acting within two years. spending limits, taxing limits, borrowing limits. i only mention this so the audience understands it is we who want to reinstall, reinstitute constitutional limited government, because the constitution is honored if at all in the breach, isn't that right? >> right.

mark: so the progressive agenda including on the courts, they wrap themselves in constitutional language and say we must follow the precedent. but the precedent isn't always constitutional, is it? >> we have very many examples where the supreme court has not followed precedent. >> mark, as a lawyer, when i think back to law school days and justice kennedy was a professor at my law school when i was, there and one of the most interesting things is somebody asked me, mark, when you were in law school, did you read the constitution? i was offended by the question. mark: and we're going to get your answer in one second. mark, did you read the constitution in law school? i know my answer. don't forget, levin tv almost every week night. join us, you will enjoy our community there. crtv.com/mark, or give us a call, 844-levin tv. we'll be right back.

. mark: so mark meckler, we have this cliff-hanger. you're in law school three years, did you ever study the constitution? >> never, not once, we never read it. it was astounding me to look back, in hindsight it is unbelievable. i took conlaw, every lawyer takes constitutional law the first year. mark: what do they teach you? >> they teach you what justices have said over the centuries about their interpretation of the constitution. but you never get the original document, you never get the founders' intent. we're learning this twisted view of the constitution that has nothing to do with the original document. mark: were you taught did texturalism or liberalism? >> no. they despise a worship of men and women in black robes who make decisions for the rest of us. mark: dr. coburn, you brought up the commerce clause, because the states were fighting with

each other. they wanted to promote commerce property right, capitalism. what's happened to the commerce clause today? >> the commerce clause has been prostituted so the federal government takes the power and decides what is or is not their bailiwick through their definition of the commerce clause, and a guy didn't do interstate commerce and because he didn't, it affected interstate commerce, and they gave a great expansion, it's just a farce. the commerce clause has been prostituted far beyond anything our founding fathers intended. mark: that was the famous wheat case where the government was insisting that this farmer grow wheat and sell it, and he was growing wheat to subsist on it, and they said no, you're affecting commerce by not being in commerce. >> right. so that's interstate commerce. mark: that's where the

regulatory state took off. >> right, and that's why they control education in your state, the state health care. health care, you just name what the federal government -- >> the environment, all of those operate under the expanded definition of the commerce clause which gives unlimited power to the federal government. >> and unelected bureaucrats decide. that not the elected representatives. people who get appointed decide your freedom. that's what needs to be reversed. if we want to fix our country and restore freedom and liberty, we need to make the decision-making closer to the people instead of unelected bureaucrats. >> isn't the battle between constitutionalism and progressivism, the progressives reject at least as i said, intellectual forefathers, the constitution, they do not like the way it's set up, they want centralized decision-making like in europe, hagel, marx, whatever you want to call it, soft communism, individuals make decisions, individuals are

not allowed to make decisions. decisions have to be made for the general good. the community. isn't that ultimately the battle we're facing right now? >> absolutely, the direction we're going. with that comes the loss of liberty, the loss of decision-making, the loss of freedom in the long term and tremendous debt. i mean how do you think we got to $22 trillion in debt? can you take some of it for the war in the middle east, but the rest of it is members of congress expanding social programs without raising the revenues to pay for them. that's where we are. and that's nothing but pure socialism. we just didn't tax to pay for it. >> mark, this is the battle of our generation literally, because the question is the progressive vision of the future or the constitutionalists vision of the future, and the progressives are lining against. this hundreds of groups are speaking out against it. new pieces every day.

they're attacking it in the culture, in the atlantic and esquire. mark: unions, environmental groups, left-wing think tanks, consumer groups, panoply of the left. >> over 200 signed a document saying it's the most dangerous thing that could happen in america. they don't tell the truth. they said something truthful. they said this is intended to reverse 115 years of progressivism and we say so i can buy from enterprise car sales and you'll take any trade-in? that's right! great! here you go... well, it does need to be a vehicle. but - i need this out of my house. (vo) with fair, transparent value for every trade-in... enterprise makes it easy.

it's league night!? 'saved money on motorcycle insurance with geico! goin' up the country. bowl without me. frank.' i'm going to get nachos. snack bar's closed. gah! ah, ah ah. ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ geico motorcycle, great rates for great rides.

. mark: mark meckler, we've got a large audience here. patriots. people say, okay, what can we do? what can we do? isn't the question what can each of you do? what can each person watching right now do? >> i think that's the fundamental question. actually it's always been the fundamental question in america because it's always relied on the individual. we're unique, the citizen is sovereign. what that means is you, as an individual are sovereign in this country, expected to be engaged and active. so most people don't realize they have the power to do something about this. they don't need the permission of the president or congress. we don't need that. what we do need is citizens, a citizen army of today, 3.5 million across the country supporting the effort. we need a lot more, mark. i think we need 30 million people engaged in the effort.

they need to get signed up with the effort. mark: what is the effort? . >> go to convention of states.com, sign up, there is a national movement. we have people in every state legislative district in the country. lobbying state legislators, talking to them, asking them to call for a convention of states. it's going to take the people. the legislatures alone don't have the guts, the wills to do. this they're politicians. they're going to be driven by regular people, by constituents by this movement. mark, it's a movement, people haven't been engaged in politics before. they didn't see a reason. they would go to d.c. and do whatever they want. people are saying it's up to themselves, not up to the politicians. they talk to the politicians, drive the politicians, call a convention. frankly, once the convention takes place, work isn't over. we're going to need the activists pressuring congress to pass the right amendments. when the amendments come out of convention, it's going to take

the activists in a ratification fight as well. mark: is this a constitutional amendment to the constitution? >> no convention of amendments only. if you have an application that says we want to reform the whole application, you get 34 states, you can do that. this is only limited to the applicable areas we have requested. so, and we think if you get some in all three of the areas, you would markedly restore the principles of federalism, balance of power between the three branches and the fourth branch we've seen in the last 50 years and the judiciary, restore the balance where you give power back to the states. mark: specific subject areas have to be agreed to by a supermajority of the states before you have a meeting. >> right. mark: as opposed to to the united states supreme court that can pick and choose its own issues, through its own cases, vote 5-4, and that's

that. and so here this is the broad body politic, not a mobocracy, to achieve something that is noble and legitimate under our constitutional system. we'll be right back. i'm going to start with some balayage clip-ins, then razor cut up to a blunt angled lob. i'm retiring; you're my swan song. what?! he's gonna slap some clips in your hair, give you a bob and then he's gonna move to boca raton. but you're gonna look amazing. ok. there are multiples on the table: one is cash, three are fha, one is va. so what can you do? she's saying a whole lotta people want to buy this house. but you got this! rocket mortgage by quicken loans makes the complex simple. understand the details and get approved in as few as eight minutes by america's largest mortgage lender.

hi there.me! so, what do you look for in a vehicle? sleek designs. performance. dependability is top on my list. well then, here's some vehicles that deliver on that. woah! wow. oh jeez! that's our truck! it's our truck! and they're our cars! that's my chevy! chevy's the only brand to earn j.d. power dependability awards across cars, trucks and suvs three years in a row. awesome. i'm proud. it's like a dynasty. it's impressive. ancestrydna can open you to a world of new cultures to explore. with two times more detail than any other dna test... you can get a new taste of your heritage. only $59- our site's lowest price ever.

omar, check this out. uh, yeah, i was calling to see if you do laser hair removal. for men. notice that my hips are off the ground. [ engine revving ]

and then, i'm gonna pike my hips back into downward dog. [ rhythmic tapping ] hey, the rain stopped. -a bad day on the road still beats a good one off it. -tell me about that dental procedure again! -i can still taste it in my mouth! -progressive helps keep you out there.

i think the government is going to continue to expand and grow and interfere in your lives, and the american people are going to understand that the debt load that's coming and the interest costs associated with that is going to limit the critical problem. you know, in less than five years, the federal budget will be made up of interest and medicare and medicaid. that's it. mark: defense? >> nope.

no money. so we will see the pressure come to the american people because of the incompetency of the government that we have today outside of the rules that our founders intended and they will come on board to solve this problem. mark: you agree? >> i agree and i agree from a grassroots perspective. having been all across the country over the last couple of years, i see a rising tide of people concerned about the fundamentals in this country and mostly what they want to do, mark, is decide for themselves. this is a fight about who decides. washington, d.c. versus the people, the founders answer that question very clearly at the beginning of the constitution in big bold calligraphy. mark: the american people will decide their own fate. that's the bottom line. and you two gentleman are among the leaders of a movement showing them the way to do it. is there a solution? yes. embrace the constitution. yes. that's where the answer is. i want to thank you, both.

>> thank you, mark. mark: really appreciate it. see you next time on "life, liberty & levin." staff's. >> i am chris wallace, president trump puts critics and the intelligence community on notice as he pulls the security clearance of john brennan and reviews the status of nine others. >> security clearance is very important to me.very important. i've had a tremendous response for having done that. >> i think he's abusing the powers of that office. i think this country is in a crisis in terms of what mr. trump has done and what he's liable to do. >> is an effort to protect national secrets or revenge? we will have mike mullen, former