The Constitution's Supermajority: Which Parts Require It?

The concept of a supermajority vote is not new, with the first recorded use of the supermajority rule taking place in ancient Rome during the 100s BCE. In the US, the Constitution specifies several instances where a supermajority is required. Supermajorities are often used to safeguard against hasty or unconsidered decisions, ensuring that significant changes or actions have broad support. Some of the main parts of the US Constitution that require a supermajority include the amendment process, which requires a two-thirds majority vote in both houses of Congress to propose an amendment, and ratification, which requires three-quarters of the state legislatures to approve the amendment. A supermajority is also required to override a presidential veto, impeach the president, or declare a president incapable of serving under the 25th Amendment. Additionally, 11 out of 49 states that require voter approval for constitutional amendments also require a supermajority vote.

Explore related products

Supermajority Voting in Constitutional Courts: The Problem of Majority Rule for Democracy and Legislation (Comparative Constitutional Change)

$56.99 $170

Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule (Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy, Series Number 10)

$25.99 $32

Numbers Rule: The Vexing Mathematics of Democracy, from Plato to the Present

$21.37 $26.95

Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work

$47 $47

The Silent Sex: Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions

$20.93 $47

Fighting for the Speakership: The House and the Rise of Party Government (Princeton Studies in American Politics)

$22.3 $35

Impeachment

The United States Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments ... [but] no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present". The president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States are subject to impeachment. The practice of impeachment originated in England and was later used by many of the American colonial and state governments.

In the case of presidential impeachment trials, the chief justice of the United States presides. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict, and the penalty for an impeached official upon conviction is removal from office. In some cases, the Senate has also disqualified such officials from holding public offices in the future. There is no appeal.

Amending the Constitution

Amending the US Constitution is a complex process that requires broad consensus and support. It is understandable that such a foundational document would necessitate careful consideration and widespread agreement for any changes. The process of amending the Constitution outlines the specific requirements for a supermajority vote, ensuring that any modifications reflect the will of a significant portion of the country.

The US Constitution, in Article V, establishes the amendment process as one of the instances where a supermajority is necessary. To propose an amendment, a two-thirds majority vote is required in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as outlined in Article V. This requirement ensures that any potential changes to the Constitution have substantial support from within the legislative branch.

However, the process doesn't end there. For an amendment to be ratified and officially become part of the Constitution, even higher support is needed. This is where the state legislatures come into play. Out of all the states, three-fourths, or 38 out of 50, must approve the proposed amendment. This step ensures that the amendment is not just the will of the federal legislators but also has the backing of a large majority of the states, reflecting a nationwide consensus.

The high bar set for amending the Constitution demonstrates the importance placed on stability and preventing hasty or divisive decisions. It is designed to make sure that any changes to the foundational laws of the nation are carefully considered and broadly accepted. This process, requiring supermajority support, acts as a safeguard against impulsive or polarising decisions that could be detrimental to the country's stability.

While the process of amending the US Constitution is deliberately challenging, it is not impossible. The Constitution has been amended several times since its ratification in 1788, albeit with the necessary supermajority consent from both Congress and the states. This careful balance between flexibility and stability ensures that the Constitution can adapt to the changing needs of the nation while preserving the core principles upon which it was founded.

Ratification of Treaties

The process of ratifying treaties in the United States involves several steps and requires the collaboration of different branches of the government. While the Executive Branch, led by the President, typically takes charge of treaty negotiations, the Senate and Congress also play crucial roles in providing advice, consent, and legislative implementation.

According to the United States Constitution, the President has the power to make treaties with the "Advice and Consent of the Senate" (Article II, Section 2). This means that the President initiates the treaty-making process, but the treaty must be approved by at least two-thirds of the Senators present, constituting a supermajority vote. This requirement ensures that treaties are not ratified without substantial support in the Senate, reflecting the importance and long-lasting impact of international agreements.

Once the Senate provides its advice and consent, the treaty is returned to the President for final ratification. The President has the authority to decide whether to enter into the treaty on behalf of the United States. This involves signing an instrument of ratification and arranging for the deposit or exchange of the instrument, as outlined by the treaty's terms.

It is worth noting that, historically, there have been instances where the President declined to ratify treaties even after receiving the Senate's advice and consent. This highlights the complexity and dynamics of the treaty-making process, where the President has the final say in expressing the nation's assent to be bound by a treaty.

While the Senate's advice and consent are crucial, it is important to understand that the Senate itself does not formally ratify treaties. Instead, after the Senate's approval, the process involves consideration by the Committee on Foreign Relations. Subsequently, the Senate either approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, the ratification is finalised through the formal exchange of instruments of ratification between the United States and the foreign party or parties to the treaty.

In summary, the ratification of treaties in the United States requires a supermajority vote of two-thirds of the Senators present, as stipulated by the Constitution. This process underscores the collaborative nature of treaty-making, involving the Executive Branch, the Senate, and, in some cases, Congress, to ensure that treaties are in line with the nation's interests and become part of federal legislation.

Explore related products

Rational Legitimacy: A Theory of Political Support (Princeton Legacy Library)

$8.72 $60

The Strategic Constitution

$71.25 $75

Saving Democracy: A Plan for Real Representation in America

$28

Holding the Center: In Defense of Political Trimming

$58.89 $61.99

The Promise of Democratic Equality in the United States

$52.24 $54.99

One-Party Government in the Ivory Coast (Princeton Legacy Library)

$55

Ballot measures

Of the 49 states that require voter approval for constitutional amendments, 11 states have supermajority requirements. These states include New Hampshire, Illinois, Florida, and Colorado. For instance, in Illinois, a supermajority vote of 60% of those voting on the amendment is required for a constitutional amendment to be approved. On the other hand, states like Minnesota require majority approval from all voters casting a ballot, and leaving a question blank is considered a "no" vote.

The specific threshold for supermajority requirements varies, with some states requiring a 60% supermajority, while others, like Colorado, demand a 55% supermajority. These requirements are in place to ensure that any changes to the constitution reflect broad consensus and prevent hasty or unconsidered alterations.

Proponents of supermajority requirements for ballot measures argue that they protect against the "whims of the majority," especially for minority groups in deeply divided societies. Additionally, they can act as a safeguard against impulsive or ill-considered decisions, ensuring that significant changes have broad support.

In contrast, critics of supermajority requirements argue that they can hinder progress and make it challenging to enact necessary legislation.

Spending bills

The Spending Clause of the US Constitution gives Congress the authority to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" and specifies that "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by law." This means that federal taxing and spending require legislation that is enacted into law.

The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 establishes an internal process for Congress to formulate and enforce an overall plan each year for acting on budget legislation. However, Congress has increasingly chosen to ignore this process. Instead, most budget decisions are made year by year through the enactment of annual appropriations bills.

In recent decades, the House has used the suspension of rules to pass various continuing resolutions and even some emergency funding packages. However, final full-year appropriations bills have always passed with a "majority of the majority."

In some cases, the majority has "divided the question" on spending bill votes, allowing members to cast separate votes on parts of a combined bill they like and dislike without endangering the entire package. This tactic was used for votes on security and non-security spending measures in 2020 and 2021, funding for the war in Iraq in 2007, and a tax package added to a wrap-up spending bill in 2015.

However, in 2024, House GOP leaders may face an unprecedented challenge: the need for a two-thirds supermajority to pass final spending bills for the current fiscal year. This requirement would have blocked numerous appropriations packages over the past 25 years, potentially leading to more partial government shutdowns and continuing resolutions.

A supermajority rule for spending bills could reduce government spending and prevent its distortion by special interests. It would require broad social consensus for decisions that dramatically affect the economic future, such as creating new entitlements or discretionary spending.

Frequently asked questions