The question often arises: What’s the difference between the three major efforts to organize the states to propose amendments by convention under Article V?
The following chart gives you a candid and detailed series of answers to that question. If you can't read it, click on it for the pdf.
You will note above that the Compact for America approach:
faces the fewest significant legal or political issues among the various approaches;
involves the fewest moving parts; and
absorbs the least amount of legislative bandwidth.
These unique advantages give the Compact approach unmatched speed and certainty.
At the same time, the Compact approach uniquely layers on 17 specific safeguards that ensure the amendment process organizes only a 24 hour convention that votes a specific amendment up or down both as a matter of law and, by aligning incentives with that outcome, as a function of the naked political ambitions of the participants.
That being said, the Compact does face some common, as well as unique, legal/political issues, which counsel in favor of a "portfolio approach" in which we support all well-crafted Article V efforts to hedge our bets.
Nevertheless, our team of experts is confident that the Compact approach to Article V will overcome all legal challenges. Every major potential issue has been thoroughly researched, assessed and addressed in our Expert FAQ, which you can obtain here.
The bottom line is that the unique speed, certainty and safety advantages of the Compact approach far outweigh any minimal risk associated with it - especially in view of the far greater risk of relying on standard electoral politics to stop Washington's abuse of its otherwise limitless credit card.