Currently introduced in the Florida State Legislature are six memorial bills: HM 261, HM 381, HM 625, HB 609, SM 476, and SM 658. Both House Memorial 381 and Senate Memorial 476 apply to Congress to "call a convention for the sole purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States which impose fiscal restraints on the Federal Government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the Federal Government, and limit the terms of office for federal officials and members of Congress." House Memorial 261 applies to Congress "pursuant to Article V of the Constitution of the United States to call a convention for the sole purpose of proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide: Congress shall pass no bill, and no bill shall become law, which embraces more than one subject, that subject to be clearly expressed in the bill's title." Both House Memorial 625 and Senate Memorial 658 apply to Congress to "call a convention for the sole purpose of proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that requires a balanced federal budget." In essence, both HM 625 and SM 658 are a request for a balanced budget amendment or BBA, by way of an Article V Convention. House Bill 609 establishes the qualifications of delegates and alternate delegates to an Article V constitutional convention, this bill also provides the instructions and limitation of power for the delegates at such a convention.

On February 6 the Virginia House of Delegates voted down, by a margin of 67-29, a resolution requesting Congress to call an Article V convention for exactly the same purpose as Florida's HM 381 and SM476.

However noble the proposals in HM 381, SM 476, HM 625, and SM 658 to apply to Congress to call an Article V Convention for the purpose of "proposing amendments to the United States Constitution that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government" or "proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that requires a balanced federal budget" might be, such amendments would have the unintended effect of legitimizing the rampant usurpations of powers that have become commonplace behavior for federal officials. Any new amendments that would impose new fiscal restraints, such as a balanced budget amendment (BBA), would change the criterion for federal expenditures from "Is this authorized by the enumerated powers of the Constitution?" to "Will these expenditures fit into a balanced budget (or be in compliance with the new fiscal restraints) and be popular with the voters?" Thus, under a BBA or other new fiscal restraints, federal officials would no longer have to be concerned with living within the enumerated powers. Furthermore, this would be a large step away from the rule of law associated with a constitutional republic toward the rule of men associated with a democracy.

However, the most important reason for defeating HM 261, HM 381, HM 625, HB 609, SM 476, and SM 658 is that the Article V convention that they call for cannot be limited. Regardless of any stipulations, limitations, or other restrictions that either the Florida State Legislature or even Congress might attempt to impose on the delegates to an Article V convention, the convention process is in actuality unlimited and could lead to unintended but yet harmful changes to the Constitution. The reason why the convention route of Article V was left unlimited in the Constitution is because the Founding Fathers originally intended it to provide a way for future Americans, if ever the need should arise, to abolish the current form of government and replace it with a new form of government and Constitution as stated in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence: